Ex parte Haymond

Good Law
1891 Cal. LEXIS 1127·91 Cal. 545·27 P. 859
Supreme Court of CaliforniaOctober 15, 1891No. 20885California355 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

The petitioner was subpoenaed as a witness before the grand jury of San Francisco. He refused to appear and testify, upon the ground that, in his opinion, the grand jury was not a lawful body. For this refusal he was convicted of a contempt of the superior court, and sentenced to fine and imprisonment. Thereupon he sued out this writ, under which he prays to be discharged from custody.

It is not controverted that he must be remanded and the writ discharged, unless he can show that the superior court exceeded its jurisdiction in the contempt proceeding.

In order to do this, petitioner offered in evidence the record of the proceedings of the superior court in ordering, selecting, summoning, and impaneling the alleged grand jury, from which he contends that it appears the superior court was guilty of such grave irregularities and violations of plain statutory provisions that the body of men by it sworn and impaneled is not even a de facto grand jury. Without passing upon the question whether the grand jury before whom the petitioner was summoned to appear was impaneled in accordance with the provisions of the law relating to that subject, it is sufficient for us to say that such…

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.