In Re Morck

California Supreme Court

In Re Morck

212 P. 616, 190 Cal. 352, 1923 Cal. LEXIS 528

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJanuary 24, 1923

DocketCrim. No. 2542.

StatusPublished

This text of 212 P. 616 (In Re Morck) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In Re Morck, 212 P. 616, 190 Cal. 352, 1923 Cal. LEXIS 528 (Cal. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COURT.

The petitioner asks for a writ of Tiabeas corpus, alleging that he is serving a sentence in the state prison at San Quentin for an attempt to commit robbery. He does not allege the term of his sentence, but alleges that he has already served, counting allowance for good credits, more than nine years, and asserts “that nine years constituted more than his half-life at the time of his commitment.” The case of People v. Sama, 189 Cal. 153 [207 Pac. 893], decided June 16, 1922, held that under the provisions of sections 664 and 671 of the Penal Code the trial court had authority to sentence a defendant for an attempt to commit robbery for any term of years which in its opinion would be a just and fair punishment. It appears from a previous application of the petitioner (In re Morck, 180 Cal. 384 [181 Pac. 657]), that he was sentenced for the term of twenty-five years. This sentence was valid (People v. Sama, supra).

The petition for the writ is denied.

Wilbur, C. J., Kerrigan, J., Waste, J., Myers, J., Lawlor, 'J., Lennon, J., and Seawell, J., concurred.

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

THE COURT.

The petitioner asks for a writ of Tiabeas corpus, alleging that he is serving a sentence in the state prison at San Quentin for an attempt to commit robbery. He does not allege the term of his sentence, but alleges that he has already served, counting allowance for good credits, more than nine years, and asserts “that nine years constituted more than his half-life at the time of his commitment.” The case of People v. Sama, 189 Cal. 153 [207 Pac. 893], decided June 16, 1922, held that under the provisions of sections 664 and 671 of the Penal Code the trial court had authority to sentence a defendant for an attempt to commit robbery for any term of years which in its opinion would be a just and fair punishment. It appears from a previous application of the petitioner (In re Morck, 180 Cal. 384 [181 Pac. 657]), that he was sentenced for the term of twenty-five years. This sentence was valid (People v. Sama, supra).

The petition for the writ is denied.

Wilbur, C. J., Kerrigan, J., Waste, J., Myers, J., Lawlor, 'J., Lennon, J., and Seawell, J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

212 P. 616, 190 Cal. 352, 1923 Cal. LEXIS 528, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-morck-cal-1923.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack