State Ex Rel. Ludwick v. District Court

Montana Supreme Court

State Ex Rel. Ludwick v. District Court

19 P.2d 1118, 92 Mont. 595, 1932 Mont. LEXIS 138

CourtMontana Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 15, 1932

DocketNo. 7,075.

StatusPublished

This text of 19 P.2d 1118 (State Ex Rel. Ludwick v. District Court) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Montana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State Ex Rel. Ludwick v. District Court, 19 P.2d 1118, 92 Mont. 595, 1932 Mont. LEXIS 138 (Mo. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this proceeding, commenced on October 6, 1932, by the filing of an application for a writ of mandate, the relator alleged that on December 29, 1930, he was charged by information with having committed the crime of assault in the second degree to which he pleaded not guilty, and that he had been deprived of his constitutional right to a speedy trial. Deeming the allegations of his petition sufficient, we issued an alternative writ of mandate, commanding the district court either to dismiss the action pending against the relator, or to show cause on this day why it should proceed otherwise. The *596 district court, through the presiding judge, has made a return to the writ, showing that on November 10, 1932, that court made and entered an order dismissing the action against the relator, discharging him from custody and exonerating his bail.

Mr, E. G. Toomey and Mr. Carl McFarland, for Relator.

The purpose of this proceeding being accomplished, nothing further remains to be done and an order of dismissal of this proceeding will be entered.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this proceeding, commenced on October 6, 1932, by the filing of an application for a writ of mandate, the relator alleged that on December 29, 1930, he was charged by information with having committed the crime of assault in the second degree to which he pleaded not guilty, and that he had been deprived of his constitutional right to a speedy trial. Deeming the allegations of his petition sufficient, we issued an alternative writ of mandate, commanding the district court either to dismiss the action pending against the relator, or to show cause on this day why it should proceed otherwise. The *596 district court, through the presiding judge, has made a return to the writ, showing that on November 10, 1932, that court made and entered an order dismissing the action against the relator, discharging him from custody and exonerating his bail.

Mr, E. G. Toomey and Mr. Carl McFarland, for Relator.

The purpose of this proceeding being accomplished, nothing further remains to be done and an order of dismissal of this proceeding will be entered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 P.2d 1118, 92 Mont. 595, 1932 Mont. LEXIS 138, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-ludwick-v-district-court-mont-1932.