In Re Henderson

Good Law
133 Cal. App. 191·1933 Cal. App. LEXIS 532·23 P.2d 780
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 6, 1933Docket No. 1755.California317 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Petitioner has applied for a writ of habeas corpxis, alleging that he is unlawfully detained and restrained of his liberty by the chief of police of the city and county of San Francisco, under the authority of a warrant of arrest issued out of the municipal court of said city and county upon the filing of a complaint therein on March 18, 1933, charging petitioner with having violated the provisions of a municipal ordinance. The ground urged for the issuance of the writ is that the ordinance is unconstitutional. Neither a copy of the ordinance nor of the complaint is presented as a part of or with the petition, and for that reason the petition is legally insufficient to authorize the issuance of the writ. (In re Crowley, 171 Cal. 58 [ 151 Pac. 739 ].)

Moreover, as held in In re Gow, 139 Cal. 242 [ 73 Pac. 145 ], when a person accused of violating an ordinance has been allowed to go at large on his own recognizance he will not be permitted to test the validity of his subsequent restraint on habeas corpus, where such restraint is invited and voluntarily submitted to before trial for that purpose only, and his nominal restraint remains such only so long as it is necessary to file a…

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.