O'Neill v. Jordan
District Court, D. Alaska
The petitioner for habeas corpus in this case was convicted in a criminal action for the crime of libel in the justices’ court for the precinct of Cape Nome, Alaska, and is in custody by virtue of a commitment upon said judgment, in' the district jail of the town of Nome.
1Opinion of the Court
TUCKER, District Judge.
Complaining that said judgment is null and void, and without any legal force or effect, in this, to wit, that said judgment was rendered in the case without his consent and before the period of six hours had elapsed from the time the jury found him guilty, the defendant or petitioner now applies to this court for a habeas corpus.
The claim of petitioner that said judgment of the justice’s court is null and void is based on section 2287 of the Comp. Daws Alaska 1913, which provides that in no case can judgment be given, except by the consent of the defendant, in less than…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- In Re HemstreetCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
3Cited by1 opinion
- Gozovich v. SullivanDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1924