In re Dolph
Supreme Court of Colorado
Original Application for Habeas Corpus. THE cause was heard and determined upon the' petition, amended .by stipulation, and the demurrer thereto by the attorney general. For constitutional provisions considered in the opinion, see Const. Colo., art. 2, secs. 8, 23 and 25; art. 6, see. 28, also Const. U. S., art. 14, sec. 1.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Elliott
The facts as stated in the petition are admitted by-the demurrer. Thus it appears that the petitioner, Dolph, was proceeded against for embezzlement, a felony under our law,, first, by a preliminary examination before a magistrate by whom he was bound over to appear, etc.; and thereafter in *36the district court by information based upon such preliminary proceedings. The preliminary examination was in all respects regular under existing laws, and the proceedings in the district court were in pursuance of the act of April 14, 1891, relating to criminal proceedings by information in courts of…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hurtado v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Rowan v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1872
- In re LosassoSupreme Court of Colorado · 1890
- In re LowrieSupreme Court of Colorado · 1885
- Miller v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1890
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- In Re McNaughtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1909
- Herron v. PassailaigueSupreme Court of Florida · 1926
- Nesbit v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1894
- Falgout v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1969
- People v. GibsonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1912
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.