Carrara v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Carrara v. Superior Court

248 P.2d 954, 113 Cal. App. 2d 823, 1952 Cal. App. LEXIS 1455

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedOctober 24, 1952

DocketCiv. No. 15565

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 248 P.2d 954 (Carrara v. Superior Court) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carrara v. Superior Court, 248 P.2d 954, 113 Cal. App. 2d 823, 1952 Cal. App. LEXIS 1455 (Cal. Ct. App. 1952).

Pincite

Opinion

DOOLING, J.

This proceeding presents the question whether the Superior Court in and for the City and County of San Francisco has jurisdiction in habeas corpus over the person of a minor actually present and residing in Alameda County. Under article VI, section 5 of our Constitution superior courts only have jurisdiction to issue “habeas corpus on petition by or on behalf of any person in actual custody, in their respective counties.” (Emphasis ours.) (Bartlett v. Superior Court, 108 Cal.App. 755 [292 P. 545]; Zeigler v. Superior Court, 134 Cal.App. 88 [24 P.2d 899]; People v. Dunlop, 102 Cal.App.2d 314 [227 P.2d 281]; People v. Ponce, 103 Cal.App.2d 271 [229 P.2d 77].)

The peremptory writ of prohibition is ordered to issue as prayed.

Goodell, Acting P. J., and Jones, J. pro tem., concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

DOOLING, J.

This proceeding presents the question whether the Superior Court in and for the City and County of San Francisco has jurisdiction in habeas corpus over the person of a minor actually present and residing in Alameda County. Under article VI, section 5 of our Constitution superior courts only have jurisdiction to issue “habeas corpus on petition by or on behalf of any person in actual custody, in their respective counties.” (Emphasis ours.) (Bartlett v. Superior Court, 108 Cal.App. 755 [292 P. 545]; Zeigler v. Superior Court, 134 Cal.App. 88 [24 P.2d 899]; People v. Dunlop, 102 Cal.App.2d 314 [227 P.2d 281]; People v. Ponce, 103 Cal.App.2d 271 [229 P.2d 77].)

The peremptory writ of prohibition is ordered to issue as prayed.

Goodell, Acting P. J., and Jones, J. pro tem., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

248 P.2d 954, 113 Cal. App. 2d 823, 1952 Cal. App. LEXIS 1455, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carrara-v-superior-court-calctapp-1952.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack