In Re Gottschalk

Good Law
1920 Cal. App. LEXIS 398·47 Cal. App. 260·190 P. 649
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 30, 1920Crim. No. 513.California957 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Prewett, J.

This is an application for a writ of habeas corpus. It appears from the statement of the facts accompanying the petition that one J. H. Anderson labored as a dredgerman for the Dutton Dredging Company from 12 o’clock noon on April 30th until about 7 A. M. on the seventh day of May. His working hours were so disposed that he worked twenty-four hours in each three days, not working, however, the same number of hours each day. Up to 12 o’clock noon on May 6th he had worked forty-eight hours. His only work during the seventh twenty-four hours was from midnight until 7 A. M. on May 7th, when he voluntarily quit work. This lacks one hour of being seven full days. The company paid him for seven days and one hour in conformity with his claim that he worked on the last day until 9 A. M. The check which he received was for $26.30, which overpaid him in the sum of about twenty cents. He claimed that he should have received about three dollars more, but his own figures do not justify this claim.

At the time that he quit work the foreman made out and delivered to him a time-check for $26.30, which check he accepted without making any claim that the amount was too small. With reference to this…

Concurring Opinion

Hart, J.

I concur in the judgment, but am of the opinion that one point not considered in the main opinion should be given some notice.

[2] At the oral argument and in the briefs, the question whether, upon habeas corpus, this court may, in a case cognizable in justices’ or police courts, examine the facts as embraced in the statement on appeal to the superior court, was discussed and vigorously affirmed by the petitioner and likewise denied by the attorney-general.

Section 1468 of the Penal Code, which is embraced within the chapter and title of the Penal Code regulating the mat ter of appeals in misdemeanor cases from justices’ and police courts, provides: “The appeal to the superior court from the judgment of a justice’s or police court is heard upon a statement of the case settled by the justice or police judge, embodying such rulings of the court as are excepted to, which statement must be filed with and settled by the court within ten days after filing notice of appeal.”

I am of the opinion that the statement on appeal from a justice’s or police court to the superior court in criminal cases the triable jurisdiction of which is in the first named courts constitutes a part of 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.