Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

United States v. Shipp

United States v. Shipp, 215 U.S. 580 (1909)

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1909-11-15
Topic
general

How later courts describe this case

  • upholding nonstatutory information filed against defendants for criminal contempt of the Supreme Court when the Court was considering habeas corpus petition of state prisoner and defendants instigated prisoner's lynching
  • upholding nonstat-utory information filed against defendants for criminal contempt of the Supreme Court when the Court was considering habeas corpus petition of state prisoner and defendants instigated prisoner’s lynching

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed United States v. Shipp. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
7 opinions
UNITED STATESv. SHIPP,215 U.S. 580(1909)
30 S.Ct. 397
UNITED STATESv. SHIPP.
INFORMATION IN CONTEMPT.
No. 4, Original [No. 5, original, of October Term, 1908].
Opinion delivered June 1, 1909.
Sentence pronounced November 15, 1909.1
ON June 1, 1909, after the opinion and judgment of the court
(214 U.S. 403) were delivered,The Solicitor Generalmoved in
open court for sentence, and thereupon the defendants Shipp,
Gibson, Williams, Nolan, Padgett and Mayes, moved for leave to
present petition for rehearing and the court ordered that they be
allowed thirty days to present a
Page 581
motion for leave to file a petition for rehearing and that they
be remanded to custody to be released on their respective
recognizances in $1,000 each to be taken by the District Judge of
the United States for the Eastern District of Tennessee. On June
7, 1909, a certificate of the said judge that such recognizances
had been taken was filed in this court.
The motions for leave to file petitions for rehearing were
received by the clerk of this court during vacation (June
1-October 11, 1909). November 1, 1909. Leave to file petitions
for rehearing denied and the above named six defendants ruled to
appear for judgment on November 15, 1909.
On November 15, 1909,Mr. Solicitor General Bowersannounced
to the court that the said six defendants were present in court
in response to the rule issued against them, and asked that
sentence be pronounced.
These defendants were then called to the bar by the clerk.
The Chief Justice announced the judgment of the court as
follows:
You, Joseph F. Shipp, Jeremiah Gibson, Luther Williams, Nick
Nolan, Henry Padgett and William Mayes, are before this court on
an attachment for contempt.
On return to a rule to show cause you have presented such
evidence as you were advised and been fully heard orally and on
printed briefs, and after thorough consideration you have been
found guilty. You have also been permitted severally to present
petitions for rehearing and move that leave be granted to file
them, which after consideration have been denied.
The grounds upon which the conclusion was reached are set
forth in the opinion filed herein on Monday, May 24, 1909, and
need not be repeated, nor need we dwell upon the destructive
consequences of permitting the transaction complained of to pass
into a precedent for unpunished contempt.
It is considered by the court, and the judgment of the court
is, that as punishment for the contempt you, Joseph F.
Page 582
Shipp, Luther Williams and Nick Nolan, and each of you, be
imprisoned for the period of ninety days, and that you, Jeremiah
Gibson, Henry Padgett and William Mayes, and each of you, be
imprisoned for the period of sixty days, in the jail of the
District of Columbia. The marshal of this court is charged with
the execution of this judgment.
November 17, 1909, the marshal filed a return that the
judgment of the court had been executed according to the tenor
thereof.
  1. Page 580 For a full report of the proceedings in this case see214 U.S. 386. ↩