In Re Mefferd

Good Law
1931 Cal. LEXIS 384·215 Cal. 768·6 P.2d 71
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 9, 1931Docket No. Crim. 3410.California535 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Waste, J.

In a criminal action commenced by the filing of a complaint in the Municipal Court of the City of Los Angeles the petitioners, George Mefferd and Joseph Waldman, were convicted of violating certain provisions of the Fruit, Nut and Vegetable Standardization Act. (Stats. 1927, p. 1845.) Contending that the act is unconstitutional and void, the petitioners appealed to the appellate department of the superior court from the judgment of conviction. The judgment was affirmed and the petitioners applied to the District Court of Appeal (Second Appellate District, Division Two) for a writ of habeas corpus, which was granted. In a written opinion [In re Mefferd,, 110 Cal. App. 1 , 6 Pac. (2d) 71 ] that court declared the act to be unconstitutional and discharged the petitioners from custody. The attorney-general thereupon made application to this court for a hearing, which was allowed. On May 1, 1931, this court filed its opinion declaring the Fruit, Nut and Vegetable Standardization Act to be a proper and valid exercise of the police power, and the petitioners were remanded to the custody of the sheriff of the county of Los Angeles. On a petition for rehearing the petitioners urged, for…

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.