Ex parte Jentzsch
California Supreme Court
Writ op Habeas Corpus from the Supreme Court to the sheriff of the City and County of San Francisco, holding the petitioner under commitment from the Police Court of said city and county, upon a judgment of conviction, for keeping open a barber-shop on Sunday afternoon, June 16, 1895. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
Petitioner was convicted under section 310-J of the Penal Code, which is a new section, enacted in 1895, and "which provides as follows: “Every person who as proprietor, manager, lessee, employee or agent keeps open or conducts, or causes to be kept open or conducted, any barber-shop, bath-house and barber-shop, barber-shop of a bathing establishment or hair-dressing establishment, or any place for shaving or hair-dressing used and conducted in connection with any other place of business or resort, or who engages at work or labor as a barber in any such shop or establishment on Sun *471day, or on…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- City of Pasadena v. StimsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Ex parte NewmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- Darcy v. Mayor of San JoseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Ex parte AndrewsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
- Ex Parte KoserCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by79 opinions
- McGowan v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Pacific Telephone Etc. Co. v. EshlemanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- Matter of Application of MillerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- State ex rel. Attorney General v. DonaldWisconsin Supreme Court · 1915
- Pierce v. Stablemen's Local 8760California Supreme Court · 1909
74 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.