Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Share your feedback on this Case Brief

Thank You For Submiting Feedback!

  • Law School Case Brief

In re Neagle - 135 U.S. 1, 10 S. Ct. 658 (1890)

Rule:

Rev. Stat. § 753 reads as follows: the writ of habeas corpus shall in no case extend to a prisoner in jail, unless where he is in custody under or by color of the authority of the United States; or is committed for trial before some court thereof; or is in custody for an act done or omitted in pursuance of a law of the United States, or of an order, process, or decree of a court or judge thereof; or is in custody in violation of the Constitution or of a law or treaty of the United States; or, being a subject or citizen of a foreign State, and domiciled therein, is in custody for an act done or omitted under any alleged right, title, authority, privilege, protection, or exemption claimed under the commission, or order, or sanction of any foreign State, or under color thereof, the validity and effect whereof depend upon the law of nations; or unless it is necessary to bring the prisoner into court to testify.

Facts:

The sheriff had held defendant on a charge of murder because he shot and killed someone while providing protection for a justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. Defendant sought a writ of habeas corpus. The circuit court found that defendant had killed the man while in the course of his duty, and ordered the defendant’s release. The sheriff sought review of the circuit court’s judgment. 

Issue:

Did the defendant commit the act of killing while in the course of his duty, thereby entitling him to the relief sought?  

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

The Court agreed with the circuit court and affirmed the release. The Court found that there were many duties that a judge could perform outside of the courtroom and that when the assailant attacked the justice, the justice was engaged in the discharge of such duties and was entitled to all the protection that the law could give him. The Court was satisfied that it was the duty of defendant, under the circumstances, to defend the justice from a murderous attack, and that defendant was within the meaning of Rev. Stat. § 753 and entitled to relief.

Access the full text case

Essential Class Preparation Skills

  • How to Answer Your Professor's Questions
  • How to Brief a Case
  • Don't Miss Important Points of Law with BARBRI Outlines (Login Required)

Essential Class Resources

  • CivPro
  • Contracts
  • Constitutional Law
  • Corporations /Business Organizations
  • Criminal Law
  • Criminal Procedure/Investigation
  • Evidence
  • Legal Ethics/Professional Responsibility
  • Property
  • Secured Transactions
  • Torts
  • Trusts & Estates