Matter of Ruef
California Supreme Court
APPLICATION for a Writ of Habeas Corpus directed to W. J. Biggy, an elisor appointed by the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Henry Ach, Samuel M. Shortridge, Frank J. Murphy, and Charles H. Fairall, for Petitioner. William H. Langdon, District Attorney, and Francis J. Heney, Assistant District Attorney, for Respondent.
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
A petition for a writ of habeas corpus is presented by A. Ruef, who alleges that he is restrained of ■his liberty and held in custody under bench warrants issued by the superior court upon five indictments purporting to charge him with the crime of extortion.
Three grounds for the issuance of the writ are urged.
1. It is alleged that one of the members of the grand jury which found and returned the indictments was not competent, by reason of the fact that he had served and been discharged as a juror by a court of record of this state within a year of the time that he was summoned and…
2Cited by51 opinions
- Atwood v. Cox, District JudgeUtah Supreme Court · 1936
- In Re BrambleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
- Ex Parte GreenallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- In Re EdwardsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
- People v. CohenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.