Legal Opinion

In Re Marzec

California Supreme Court

Decided January 23, 1945No. Crim. 4547PublishedCited by 43 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.

By writ of habeas corpus, Pete Marzee is seeking relief from conditions imposed upon him as a parolee from the State Prison at Folsom following his conviction of a felony. He asserts that the state'now has no authority either to imprison him further or to subject him to restraint by requiring compliance with certain conditions restricting his liberty.

The situation is a somewhat unusual one. Prior to 1940, Marzee twice had been convicted of a felony and was in this state after having escaped from the New Mexico State Penitentiary. In that year, by a judgment of the Superior Court of Los…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. People Ex Rel. Barrett v. BartleyIllinois Supreme Court · 1943
  2. In Re WhittingtonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1917
  3. In Re TennerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Matter of Application of StantonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  5. In Re McBrideCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929

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

3Cited by43 opinions

  1. People v. DenneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  2. People v. HernandezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
  3. In Re SchoengarthCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  4. In Re PetersenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  5. In Re BandmannCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958

38 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