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
- Cohens v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1821
- In re RingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- People v. KingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
- Ex Parte MurrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
- People v. LewisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
3Cited by10 opinions
- People v. WheatleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- People v. SicklesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
- State v. O'NeillMontana Supreme Court · 1926
- Jensen v. PradereNevada Supreme Court · 1916
- People v. FowlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.