In Re Arata
California Court of Appeal
APPLICATION for a Writ of Habeas Corpus to secure release from detention by a city chief of police. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. James W. Groom, Paul W. Schenk, Frank Dominguez and Richard Kittrelle for Petitioner.
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
Habeas corpus to determine the right of respondent to detain petitioner and deprive her of her liberty. Upon return being made to the writ and hearing had thereon, petitioner’s prayer was granted and her discharge ordered by decision heretofore made from the bench. That the reasons for the decision may be made to fully appear, this opinion is now filed.
In thé petition filed herein it was alleged that respondent, chief of police, detained and confined in the city prison of Los Angeles the petitioner, and that said detention and imprisonment was without process of law or lawful…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- In Re MilsteadCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
3Cited by13 opinions
- Ex Parte FowlerCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1947
- In Re MartinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- Roxanne Reynolds v. William McNichols Mayor of the City and County of DenverCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1973
- In Re DaytonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- In Re ClementeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.