Ex parte O'Brien
Supreme Court of Missouri
Habeas Corpus. (1) No appeal or writ of error would lie. Habeas ■corpus is the only remedy and the proper one. R. S. 1889, secs. 3263, 5378. The process (commitment) was issued under circumstances not allowed by law; for where the alleged contemptuous conduct occurs beyond the immediate view and presence of the court, the law requires (sec. 3263, supra) citation before commitment.
Read the full summary
Habeas Corpus. (1) No appeal or writ of error would lie. Habeas ■corpus is the only remedy and the proper one. R. S. 1889, secs. 3263, 5378. The process (commitment) was issued under circumstances not allowed by law; for where the alleged contemptuous conduct occurs beyond the immediate view and presence of the court, the law requires (sec. 3263, supra) citation before commitment. And, second, the jurisdiction of the court was “exceeded as to person,” because the court could have no jurisdiction of the person without bringing the individual before it by citation. Hurd on Habeas Corpus [2 Ed.)…
1Opinion of the CourtSherwood, J.
The petitioner herein has sued out a writ of habeas corpus, and questions thereby the validity of certain proceedings had in the St. Louis court of criminal correction on the twenty-first of December, 1894. Those proceedings had their origin in an attempt made by one Thomas Murphy, a policeman, on the complaint of Henry Roetter, to arrest one
*483
Mark made by Officer Sullivan as place of arrest of Wright,
*484William Wright, a negro, on a charge of carrying a revolver and disturbing the peace.
On attempting the arrest, the negro shot Murphy with the revolver, once through the shoulder and once through…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Ex Parte LangeSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Elliott v. Lessee of PeirsolSupreme Court of the United States · 1828
- People Ex Rel. Tweed v. . LiscombNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Ex Parte KearneySupreme Court of the United States · 1822
- People Ex Rel. Trainor v. BakerNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- In re ClarkSupreme Court of Missouri · 1907
- Curtis v. TozerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1964
- State ex rel. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. BlandSupreme Court of Missouri · 1905
- In re HowellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1918
- State v. WinthropWashington Supreme Court · 1928
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.