Legal Opinion

Ex parte Abbott

California Supreme Court

Decided April 18, 1892PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Application to the Supreme Court for a discharge upon a writ of habeas corpus. The facts are stated in tne opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtBeatty, C. J.

Petitioner was duly convicted in the superior court of Los Angeles of a contempt of its authority, and sentenced to pay a fine of four hundred dollars, and in default of payment, to be imprisoned in satisfaction of the fine one day for every two dollars of the fine unpaid. In pursuance of said judgment, he has been committed to and is imprisoned in the county jail. He asks to be discharged, upon the ground that since the recent amendment of section 1205 of the Penal Code (Stats. 1891, p. 52),the superior courts have no power in contempt cases to imprison the defendant in satisfaction of a…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Ex parte CrittendenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. H. J. Heinz Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
  2. In Re CiraoloCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
  3. In Re GarnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Ex Parte KarlsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  5. In Re JorgensenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API