CHANROBLES VIRTUAL LAW LIBRARY
US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for www.chanrobles.com


UNITED STATES V. CERULLO, 396 U. S. 1232 (1969)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 396 U. S. 1232 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

United States v. Cerullo, 396 U.S. 1232 (1969)

United States v. Cerullo

Decided October 16, 1969

396 U.S. 1232

ON APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE PETITION

FOR CERTIORARI; MOTION FOR STAY; AND APPLICATION FOR BAIL

PENDING PETITION FOR CERTIORARI

Syllabus

Time extension for filing petition for certiorari denied, since sufficient time remains for that purpose. Stay of Court of Appeal mandate denied, as that mandate has already issued. Application for bail pending action on petition for certiorari is denied, since initial ruling on such an application should be made by Court of Appeal, to which request may be made under Fed.Rule App.Proc. 23(b).

See: 393 F.2d 879 and 294 F.Supp. 1283.

Memorandum of MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, Circuit Justice.

Applicant requests an extension of time to file a petition for certiorari. Since, in the posture of this case, his time for filing will not expire until December 31, 1969, I perceive no necessity for an extension at this stage. No reason appears why the time remaining will not be sufficient for the preparation and filing of a petition for certiorari.

Applicant also requests a stay of the mandate of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and continuance of bail pending determination of his petition for certiorari. Pursuant to the opinion of the Court of Appeals, the mandate has already issued. Treating the papers as an application for bail pending action on the petition, I note that there is no sign that applicant has made a request to the Court of Appeals, as he may under Fed.Rule App.Proc. 23(b). In my view, that court should have an opportunity to consider applicant's request before it is entertained by a Justice of this Court. Cf. U.S.Sup.Ct.Rule 27.





Back
ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for chanrobles.com Search for www.chanrobles.com


Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



www.chanrobles.us




QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

Browse By ->> Volume


cralaw

Browse By ->> Year


cralaw

  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
 
RED