Legal Opinion

Ex parte Hollwedell

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided October 15, 1881PublishedCited by 49 opinions

Habeas Corpus. The offense charged is an offense against the laws of 'the State. The proceeding to enforce the penalty for such offense must be criminal, and conform to the requirements of the constitution and laws of the State.

Read the full summary

Habeas Corpus. The offense charged is an offense against the laws of 'the State. The proceeding to enforce the penalty for such offense must be criminal, and conform to the requirements of the constitution and laws of the State. Gilmore v. Dawson, 64 Mo. 310; Const, of Mo., art. 6, § 38, art. 1, §§ 12, 16, 30, 31; City v. Fitz, 53 Mo. 588. The only action authorized by the charter and ordinances is, in form and nature, a civil action for a debt, hence there can be no judgment authorizing imprisonment or compulsory labor. The prisoner is entitled to his discharge. City Charter, .art. 3, § 26,…

1Opinion of the CourtNorton, J.

This is a proceeding under the habeas -corpus act, in which petitioner alleges that he is illegally *397restrained of his liberty by William Kunz, keeper of the work-house in the city of St. Louis. In his return to the writ said Kunz answered that he held the petitioner in custody by virtue of an execution issued by the clerk of the first district police court of the city of St. Louis, in words as follows:

“ State of Missouri, to the Marshal of tbe city of St. Louis.

—Greeting:

“ Whereas, on the 21st day of June, 1881, the city of' St. Louis hath obtained judgment before the police justice of the…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. City of Kansas v. ClarkSupreme Court of Missouri · 1878
  2. People Ex Rel. Murray v. Justices of Court of Special Sessions of PeaceNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
  3. City of St. Louis v. SternbergSupreme Court of Missouri · 1879
  4. Williams v. City Council of AugustaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1848
  5. In re ToneySupreme Court of Missouri · 1848

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

3Cited by49 opinions

  1. City of St. Louis v. WeitzelSupreme Court of Missouri · 1895
  2. State ex rel. Reid v. WalbridgeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
  3. McInerney v. City of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1892
  4. State v. LeeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1882
  5. City of Clayton v. NemoursMissouri Court of Appeals · 1942

44 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