In re Messenheimer

California Court of Appeal

In re Messenheimer

32 Cal. App. 808

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedJanuary 31, 1917

DocketCrim. No. 529

StatusPublished

This text of 32 Cal. App. 808 (In re Messenheimer) 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

In re Messenheimer, 32 Cal. App. 808 (Cal. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

JAMES, J.

In this matter petitioner was charged under the same ordinance and in like form as was the petitioner Wisner in the habeas corpus matter decided this day (Crim. No. 528), ante, p. 637, the only difference being that the petitioner here was charged with having played upon a different musical instrument from that used by said Wisner. What is said in the opinion in the matter of Wisner is applicable here. Upon the authority of that decision, it is ordered that petitioner be discharged from custody.

Conrey, P. J., concurred.

Shaw, J., concurred in the judgment.

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

JAMES, J.

In this matter petitioner was charged under the same ordinance and in like form as was the petitioner Wisner in the habeas corpus matter decided this day (Crim. No. 528), ante, p. 637, the only difference being that the petitioner here was charged with having played upon a different musical instrument from that used by said Wisner. What is said in the opinion in the matter of Wisner is applicable here. Upon the authority of that decision, it is ordered that petitioner be discharged from custody.

Conrey, P. J., concurred.

Shaw, J., concurred in the judgment.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 Cal. App. 808, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-messenheimer-calctapp-1917.