Legal Opinion
In Re Arthur N.
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 24, 1974No. Crim. 7024PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
JANES, J.
Upon petitioner’s application to this court for a writ of habeas corpus, we issued an order to show cause on September 17, 1973, and informed the parties that the petition had been treated by us as a motion for an order permitting petitioner to file a late notice of appeal. (See People v. Serrano (1973) 33 Cal.App.3d 331 [109 Cal.Rptr. 30].) Thereafter, in In re Benoit (1973) 10 Cal.3d 72, at page 78 [109 Cal.Rptr. 785, 514 P.2d 97], the Supreme Court indicated that habeas corpus is a proper remedy in such cases. We treat the application, therefore, in the manner in which it…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- In Re GAULTSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Rinaldi v. YeagerSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Serrano v. PriestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- In Re BenoitCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Ford v. Arthur N.California Supreme Court · 1976
- People v. Javier A.California Court of Appeal · 1984
- Gilliam v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1991
- Castro v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
- People v. E.L.B.California Court of Appeal · 1985
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.