Manning v. Municipal Court
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
ROUSE, Acting P. J.
Defendant, Gail Manning, was charged by a first amended complaint, filed in the municipal court, which alleged a violation of section 316 of the Penal Code in that she “did willfully and unlawfully keep a house used for the purpose of assignation or prostitution, and did let rooms, apartments, or tenements, knowing that it [íz'c] was to be used for the purpose of assignation or prostitution.” She demurred to the complaint, contending, inter alia, that section 316 was unconstitutional because it was overbroad and void for vagueness. The municipal court overruled the…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Papachristou v. City of JacksonvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- In Re BellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Pryor v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
- Pryor v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.