Matter of Application of Clary
California Supreme Court
APPLICATION for Writ of Habeas Corpus to the Superintendent of the Mendocino State Hospital. Writ made returnable to the Superior Court of Sonoma County. Albert 0. Burnett, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
The petitioner, a patient confined in the Mendocino state hospital for the insane, applies for his discharge by habeas corpus on two grounds; first, that the commitment under which he is confined is void; second, that he is not insane.
1. The petition avers that he has applied on the same grounds to the superior court of Mendocino County, and to • the district court of appeal for the second district, for discharge on habeas corpus, that the superior court, after a hearing, denied the same, and that the district court of appeal, after a hearing, was unable to agree as to whether or not the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Matter of LambertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Ex Parte SohnckeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- McAllister v. HamlinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Santa Cruz Rock Pavement Co. v. LyonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- County of Orange v. HarrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
3Cited by14 opinions
- Matter of Application of O'ConnorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915
- State Ex Rel. Charette v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1939
- Belknap v. ShockWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1943
- Sapiro v. FrisbieCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- Napa State Hospital v. DassoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.