In Re Potter

Good Law
1914 Cal. App. LEXIS 26·26 Cal. App. 45·146 P. 62
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 27, 1914Crim No. 351.California533 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Conrey, J.

On writ of habeas corpus directed to the chief of police of the city of Los Angeles.

Petitioner is held under arrest by virtue of a criminal complaint charging him with a violation of the provisions of “an act to regulate the sale of poisons in the state of California and providing a penalty for the violation thereof,” commonly known as the Poison Act. This petitioner is the same person who was the petitioner in the ease of In re Potter, 164 Cal. 735 , [ 130 Pac. 721 ], The facts in that case are similar to those here presented and the statutes affecting the case are the same now as then, with the exceptions hereinafter noted. A certain act, referred to in the briefs in this case as the insecticide or fungicide act, approved May 1, 1911, was amended by an act approved June 2, 1913, by adding thereto a section numbered 14a. (Stats. 1911, p. 1248; Stats. 1913, p. 363.) In that new section “ant poison” was included in a list of articles permitted to be sold by grocers and dealers generally without restriction. Section 7 of the so-called Poison Act was amended June 11, 1913. (Stats. 1913, p. 694.) Prior to this amendment said section 7, in schedule “A” referred to therein, included “…

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.