Ex parte Lucas
Supreme Court of Missouri
Habeas Corpus. (1) This court bas decided that it will at any stage of criminal proceedings, and even after judgment, interfere by means of tbe writ of babeas corpus to look into and investigate tbe constitutionality of a statute.
Read the full summary
Habeas Corpus. (1) This court bas decided that it will at any stage of criminal proceedings, and even after judgment, interfere by means of tbe writ of babeas corpus to look into and investigate tbe constitutionality of a statute. Ex Parte Smith, 1-35 Mo. 223. (2) Chapter 78, Revised Statutes 1899, is void and unconstitutional as being in violation of section 53 of article 4 of tbe Constitution, for tbe reason that it is a special law, intended to regulate the affairs of existing cities of a population of 50,000 inhabitants, with provisions in it not applicable to cities which may come into…
1Opinion of the CourtMarshall, J.
This is a proceeding by habeas corpus, to test the legality of the imprisonment of the petitioner by Samuel Chiles, marshal of Jackson county, under an information filed in the criminal court of Jackson county by the prosecuting attorney of that county, charging him with practicing the occupation of barber without having procured a certificate of authority so.to do from the State Board of Examiners for barbers, contrary to the provisions of chapter 78, Eevised Statutes 1899, being “An Act to establish a board of examiners and to regulate the occupation of a barber, in this State, and to…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Dent v. West VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Barbier v. ConnollySupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Missouri v. LewisSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- People Ex Rel. Nechamcus v. Warden of the City PrisonNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
- City of St. Louis v. WeitzelSupreme Court of Missouri · 1895
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by50 opinions
- Cooper v. RollinsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1922
- Bellerive Investment Co. v. Kansas CitySupreme Court of Missouri · 1929
- State ex inf. Hadley v. WashburnSupreme Court of Missouri · 1902
- Strange v. Board of CommissionersIndiana Supreme Court · 1910
- Riley v. ForbesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.