Legal Opinion
In Re Hoffman
California Supreme Court
Decided December 11, 1967No. Crim. 11026Published
1Opinion of the Court
67 Cal.2d 845 (1967)
In re FREDERICK A. HOFFMAN et al. on Habeas Corpus.
Crim. No. 11026.
Supreme Court of California. In Bank.
Dec. 11, 1967.
A. L. Wirin, Fred Okrand, Laurence R. Sperber and Michael Hannon for Petitioners.
Roger Arnebergh, City Attorney, Philip E. Grey, Assistant City Attorney, and Michael T. Sauer, Deputy City Attorney, for Respondent.
TRAYNOR, C. J.
Petitioners were convicted in the Los Angeles Municipal Court of violating a city ordinance [fn. 1] restricting the right to be in a railroad station. The Appellate Department of the Superior Court affirmed the convictions and refused…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited39 opinions
- New York Times Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Cantwell v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Chaplinsky v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Haguer v. Committee for Industrial OrganizationSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Shelton v. TuckerSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.