Legal Opinion · Dissent

Willard v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court

Decided January 4, 1890No. 20573Published

Application for a writ of mandate to the Superior Court of Santa Barbara County, The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1DissentThornton, J.

I dissent. A defendant proceeded against for a felony has a right, under section 13, article 1, of the constitution of this state, “to have the process of the court to compel the attendance of witnesses on his behalf.” He has the same right to this process as he has “to appear and defend in person and with counsel.” Both are secured by the above section of the constitution. This process cannot be denied to him by any power of the state, whether by legislative, executive, or judicial. The constitution (section above noted) assures this right to a defendant accused *463of felony. It needs no…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Merced Mining Co. v. FremontCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
  2. People v. HurtadoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
  3. People v. FrancisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
  4. Clark v. CraneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
  5. Fremont v. CrippenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858

2 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