General
Ex parte John Botwinski
314 U.S. 586·Supreme Court of the United States·1942
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
No. —, original.
Ex parte John Botwinski.
January 5, 1942.
Mr. Oscar B. Thiel for petitioner.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
It does not appear that petitioner has exhausted his state remedies by applying for a writ of error coram nobis. State ex rel. Dowd v. Superior Court of La Porte County, 36 N. E. 2d 765; State ex rel. Kunkel v. Circuit Court of La Porte County, 209 Ind. 682, 200 N. E. 614. The motion for leave to file a petition for writ of habeas corpus is therefore denied without prejudice. Mooney v. Holohan, 294 U. S. 103.