Legal Opinion
Ex parte Stice
California Supreme Court
Decided June 24, 1886No. 20205PublishedCited by 49 opinions
Application for a writ of habeas corpus. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtThornton, J.
Petition by Stice for discharge on writ of habeas corpus.
The return shows that the petitioner, Stice, is in the custody of the sheriff of San Benito County by virtue of a commitment of the Superior Court of that county, of which the following is a copy:—
“In the Superior Court of San Benito County. State of
California v. J. F. Prewett.
“ On this first day of March, 1886, at the hour of two o’clock, p. m., the above-named cause was upon trial in the above-entitled court, and Richmond Stice was called as a witness for the people, and was ordered by the said court to be sworn as a witness, and…
2Cited by49 opinions
- People v. KynetteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
- People v. GilbertCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
- Overend v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- United States v. KimballU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1902
- People v. FordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.