Ex parte Crookshank
District Court, S.D. California
Habeas Corpus. Application by S. C. Crooksbank for writ to secure release from custody of city marshal. Demurrer to petition sustained, and petitioner remanded to custody.
1Opinion of the Court
BLEDSOE, District Judge.
On the 20th day of September, 1920, the council of the city of Bakersfield, operating under a freeholders’ charier authorized by the Constitution of the state of California, duly passed an ordinance prohibiting certain uses of intoxicating liquors. Relevant sections involved contain the following provisions:
Section 1: “This entire ordinance shall be deemed to be an exercise of the power granted by Article Eighteen of the Constitution of the United States and of the police power of the city of Bakersfield for the protection of the public health, peace, safety, and…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- M'culloch v. State of MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1819
- Mugler v. KansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Hamilton v. Kentucky Distilleries & Warehouse Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Houston v. MooreSupreme Court of the United States · 1820
- Purity Extract & Tonic Co. v. LynchSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- State v. GauthierSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1922
- In Re VolpiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- In Re PolizzottoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- People v. CapelliCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- People v. CollinsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.