Ex parte Sing Ah Tong

Good Law
1890 Cal. LEXIS 780·84 Cal. 165·24 P. 181
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMay 17, 1890No. 20693California716 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Beatty, J.

The petitioner was prosecuted under section 330 of the Penal Code, and convicted of the offense therein defined. It is provided that persons so convicted shall be “ punishable by fine of not less than two hundred dollars nor more than one thousand dollars, and shall be imprisoned in the county jail until such fine and costs of prosecution are paid, such imprisonment not to exceed one year.” (Pen. Code, sec. 330.)

It appears by the return to the writ that judgment was rendered against the petitioner in the following terms, after reciting the conviction: “It is ordered and adjudged as a punishment therefor that the said Sing Ah Tong pay a fine of $250, and in default of payment thereof, that said Sing Ah Tong be imprisoned in the county jail of this city and county at the rate of one day for each one dollar of fine until said fine is satisfied.”

It is argued that this judgment is void because it is evidently based upon the provisions of section 1205 or of section 1446 of the Penal Code, which have been held not to apply to convictions under section 330. (Ex parte Harrison, 63 Cal. 299 .)

It is true that in the case cited those sections and the judgment which they prescribe were…

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.