Legal Opinion

In Re Oxidean

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 26, 1961No. Crim. 7864PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SPARKS, J. pro tem. *

Petitioner, who is imprisoned in the Ventura County jail, seeks a writ of habeas corpus “alleging the Superior Court, California, Ventura California with default in omission of duty as required by law & malicious prosecution.” Specifications set forth in his petition, filed in propria persona, are: (1) that although he was eligible for probation no reference was made to the probation officer in his case prior to the pronouncement of judgment, as required by section 1203 of the Penal Code; (2) that a eo defendant with equal participation in the crimes of which petitioner…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. People v. WadeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
  2. In Re BellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. In Re LindleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  4. In Re TrombleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  5. In Re SeeleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. In Re AntazoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  2. People v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Franklin v. StateIdaho Supreme Court · 1964
  4. People v. WoolbertCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  5. In Re SandsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977

9 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