In Re Varona

232 P.2d 923, 38 Wash. 2d 833, 1951 Wash. LEXIS 491
CourtWashington Supreme Court
DecidedJune 21, 1951
Docket31806
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 232 P.2d 923 (In Re Varona) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Washington 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 Varona, 232 P.2d 923, 38 Wash. 2d 833, 1951 Wash. LEXIS 491 (Wash. 1951).

Opinion

Mallery, J.

The petitioner, Pedro Varona, comes to this court seeking a writ of habeas corpus. He is the subject of an extradition proceeding requested by the governor of California. The governor of the state of Washington stayed the execution of the rendition warrant to permit the bringing of the instant action.

Petitioner was charged in the police court in and for the city of Stockton in the county of San Joaquin, state of California, as follows:

"... that the said Pedro Varona did, at and in the County and State aforesaid, on or about the date aforesaid, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously take Six hundred and twenty dollars, ($620.00), in money, lawful money of the United States the personal property of Isabelo V. La Bre, Pascual Fidel and Pedro Varona, doing business as Varona Wholesalers, a partnership.”

We said In re Wallace, ante p. 67, 227 P. (2d) 737:

“The only prerequisites to extradition from one state to another are that the person sought to be extradited is sub *834 stantially charged with a crime against the laws of the demanding state, and that he is a fugitive from justice.”

The question before us is: Was the petitioner substantially charged with a crime against the laws of California?

It appears to be the settled law of the state of California that a partner cannot be guilty of theft of the funds of the partnership of which he is a member. People v. Brody, 29 Cal. App. (2d) 6, 83 P. (2d) 952. See, also, People v. Hotz, 85 Cal. App. 450, 259 Pac. 506; People v. Foss, 7 Cal. (2d) 669, 62 P. (2d) 372; Dethlefsen v. Stull, 86 Cal App. (2d) 499, 195 P. (2d) 56.

The petitioner not being substantially charged with a crime, the application for the writ is granted.

Schwellenbach, C. J., Grady, Hamley, and Weaver, JJ., concur.

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

Related

White v. King County
748 P.2d 616 (Washington Supreme Court, 1988)
People v. Superior Court (Smolin)
716 P.2d 991 (California Supreme Court, 1986)
State Ex Rel. Boutwell v. Coughlin
586 P.2d 1145 (Washington Supreme Court, 1978)
In Re Writ of Habeas Corpus of Jeffries
548 P.2d 594 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1976)
In Re Rayborn
171 N.W.2d 460 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1969)
In Re Wheeler
280 P.2d 673 (Washington Supreme Court, 1955)
In Re Application of Summers
243 P.2d 494 (Washington Supreme Court, 1952)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
232 P.2d 923, 38 Wash. 2d 833, 1951 Wash. LEXIS 491, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-varona-wash-1951.