Legal Opinion

Yutze v. Copelan

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 26, 1923No. 17942PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJones, J.

One question presented by this record is whether a writ of habeas corpus will lie to test the constitutionality of an ordinance in favor of one who has been convicted of its violation. Upon this question there is a contrariety of opinion ■ in the various state jurisdictions. The text in 29 Corpus Juris, p. 35, and 12 Ruling Case Law, p. 1199, states that the weight of authority supports the rule that a court on habeas corpus proceedings may inquire into the constitutionality of a statute under which the petitioner has been convicted, and that if the statute proves to be unconstitutional the…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Ex Parte RoyallSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  2. Ex Parte SieboldSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
  3. Ex Parte YarbroughSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  4. Ex Parte Tobias WatkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1830
  5. Ex Parte ParksSupreme Court of the United States · 1876

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Moock v. City of CincinnatiOhio Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Ex Parte ElickerOhio Supreme Court · 1927
  3. State v. WilesOhio Court of Appeals · 1998
  4. Dowd, Warden v. GrazerIndiana Supreme Court · 1953
  5. In the Matter of FenwickOhio Supreme Court · 1924

19 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