Ex Parte Thistleton

Good Law
52 Cal. 220
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 1, 1877No. 10,275California1,833 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

McKinstry, J.

The omission of the Legislature to provide the machinery for taking appeals in these cases from the City Criminal Court to the County Court is fatal to so much of the act creating the City Criminal Court as attempts to confer jurisdiction to try *221 them. The act pro tanto is unconstitutional and void. “ No person shall be deprived of liberty without due process of law.” This expression of the organic law, as applied to criminal cases, means that no less than all the forms and means and solemnities for ascertaining his guilt shall be used and applied before the party accused can be condemned. (Taylor v. Porter, 4 Hill, 147 .)

The definition given the phrase “ due process of law,” by Daniel Webster, in his argument upon the Dartmouth College case, is the one most frequently adopted by the Courts. He says: “ By the law of the land is most clearly intended the general law; a law which hears before it condemns; which proceeds upon inquiry,' and renders judgment only after trial.”

If it be necessary to the judicial determination of the guilt of the accused that an appeal should be allowed him, and he is .balked of that appeal by the Legislature, and a judgment is pronounced against…

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.