In Re Haines

Good Law
1925 Cal. LEXIS 400·195 Cal. 605·234 P. 883
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 19, 1925Docket No. Crim. 2730.California5,132 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Lawlor, J.

Habeas corpus. The facts in the above-entitled matter are stipulated to be as follows:

Petitioner, by virtue of this charge, was imprisoned, detained, confined, and restrained of his liberty by W. W. Sublett, sheriff of the county of Shasta, at the county jail in said county, and it it was with regard to this custody that this court granted his petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

It is contended by petitioner that the charge under which he is held and thereby deprived of his liberty does not constitute a public offense, “inasmuch as, at the time of said alleged escape said George Haines was not a prisoner charged with or convicted of a felony, but was a prisoner convicted of a misdemeanor”; that section 107 of the Penal Code “applies only to prisoners charged with or convicted of a felony. The gist of said section is, ‘ Every prisoner charged with or convicted of a felony . . . who escapes or attempts to escape ... is guilty of a felony and is punishable as provided in section 108 of the Penal Code. ’ In between the words quoted, there appear several relative clauses, all beginning with the word ‘who,’ and connected by the disjunctive ‘or.’ It seems apparent that the relative…

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.