In re Way

California Supreme Court

In re Way

58 P.2d 916, 6 Cal. 2d 779, 1936 Cal. LEXIS 584

California Supreme Court·Decided June 18, 1936·No. Crim. No. 3974·Published

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.

In re Way, 58 P.2d 916, 6 Cal. 2d 779, 1936 Cal. LEXIS 584 (Cal. 1936).

Pincite

58 P.2d 916 (In re Way) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related