In Re Cole

Good Law
12 Cal. App. 290·1909 Cal. App. LEXIS 11·107 P. 581
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 24, 1909Crim. No. 123.California756 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Burnett, J.

Petitioners were charged with the violation of an ordinance entitled “An ordinance prohibiting the casting, extending or setting of any seine or net of any kind for the catching of any fish in any river, stream or slough in the county of Sonoma,” and1 passed by the board of supervisors of said county on the fourteenth day of February, 1899.

The authority of the board to enact said ordinance, its validity when enacted, the sufficiency of the complaint charging the offense and the regularity of the proceedings culminating in the arrest of petitioners are all unchallenged. Petitioners’ only contention is that said ordinance has been abrogated by section 25% of article IV of the constitution of the state, adopted as an amendment in 1902. Said amendment is as follows: “The legislature may provide for the division of the state into fish and game districts, and may enact such laws for the protection of fish and game therein as it may deem appropriate for the respective districts.”

It is admitted that the legislature has taken no action in pursuance of said amendment, and as the provision itself is not self-operative, it is impossible to hold that by the terms of said amendment the…

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.