In Re Anderson

Good Law
18 Cal. App. 593·1912 Cal. App. LEXIS 402·123 P. 972
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 1, 1912Crim. No. 233.California250 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

James, J.

Petitioner herein, after having been convicted of violating an ordinance of the city of Pasadena designed to regulate the standing of public carriages on the streets of said city, and after having been imprisoned in default of payment of a fine imposed by the police court, petitioned for release upon habeas corpus. In his petition he assigned as ground thereof that the ordinance under which his conviction was had is unconstitutional and void. Although time was allowed petitioner within which to file a brief and point out wherein the provisions of the ordinance are in conflict with the constitution, no brief has been filed and no authorities cited in support of the petition. We conceive it not to be the duty of this court to seek for some cause which shall result in nullifying the ordinance on the ground proposed by petitioner. An inspection- of the ordinance does not disclose any apparent infirmity of the kind suggested, and with that conclusion we shall rest content, unless differently convinced in a case where the contentions here made are supported by argument or authority. Courts will not hold statutes or ordinances unconstitutional unless it is clearly shown that they are…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.