In re Way

California Supreme Court

In re Way

6 Cal. 2d 779

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJune 18, 1936

DocketCrim. No. 3974

StatusPublished

This text of 6 Cal. 2d 779 (In re Way) 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 Way, 6 Cal. 2d 779 (Cal. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COURT.

In this case, as in the case of In re Mark, Crim. No. 3973 (ante, p. 516 [58 Pac. (2d) 913]), this day decided, a writ of habeas corpus was issued for the purpose of considering the validity of the arrest and conviction of the petitioner for a violation of section 5-8.22 of the same ordinance of the city of Oakland which was involved in the Mark ease. Inasmuch as each case depended upon identical questions of fact and law, the disposition of the matter in the Mark case is controlling here.

It is therefore ordered that the petitioner be discharged from custody.

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

THE COURT.

In this case, as in the case of In re Mark, Crim. No. 3973 (ante, p. 516 [58 Pac. (2d) 913]), this day decided, a writ of habeas corpus was issued for the purpose of considering the validity of the arrest and conviction of the petitioner for a violation of section 5-8.22 of the same ordinance of the city of Oakland which was involved in the Mark ease. Inasmuch as each case depended upon identical questions of fact and law, the disposition of the matter in the Mark case is controlling here.

It is therefore ordered that the petitioner be discharged from custody.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 Cal. 2d 779, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-way-cal-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack