In Re Hartman
California Supreme Court
APPLICATION for a Writ of Habeas Corpus to procure the release of petitioner after conviction of violation of municipal ordinance. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
KERRIGAN, J., pro tem.
—Petition for writ of habeas corpus.
The petitioners are serving a term of 120 days imprisonment for violating the provisions of an ordinance of the city of Los Angeles which enacts:
“Section 1. It shall be unlawful for any person ... to display, or to cause or permit to be displayed, publicly or privately, or to have in possession, within the city of Los Angeles any flag, insignia, emblem or device of any nature whatsoever representative of any nation, sovereignty, society, association or organized or unorganized effort of any nature whatsoever which in its purposes,…
2Cited by10 opinions
- State v. LaundyOregon Supreme Court · 1922
- People v. MalleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
- People v. YoungCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
- Taylor v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1943
- In Re CampbellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.