Legal Opinion

Ex parte Young Ah Gow

California Supreme Court

Decided September 26, 1887No. 20296PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Application for a writ of habeas corpus. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtThornton, J.

— The return shows that the petitioner for the writ was imprisoned on a commitment issued out of the Superior Court of the city- and county of San Francisco, of which the following is a copy: —

“ Commitment.
“ In the Superior Court, City and County of San Francisco, State of California, Department Five, Tuesday, March 29, 1887.
“ Present, Hon. John Hunt, Judge.
“ The People of the State of California v. Young Ah Gow, convicted of petit larceny, second offense.
“ The district attorney, with the defendant and his counsel, Mr. L. I. Mowry, came into court. The defendant was duly informed by the court…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Cohens v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1821
  2. In re RingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
  3. People v. KingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
  4. Ex Parte MurrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
  5. People v. LewisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. People v. WheatleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. People v. SicklesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
  3. State v. O'NeillMontana Supreme Court · 1926
  4. Jensen v. PradereNevada Supreme Court · 1916
  5. People v. FowlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891

5 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