Ex parte Liddell
California Supreme Court
Application to the Supreme Court for a discharge, upon a writ of habeas corpus. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtPaterson, J.
The petitioner, a boy fifteen years of age, was charged in the justice’s court of Los Angeles city township with the crime of petit larceny, and upon being arraigned, entered a plea of guilty as charged. Thereupon the court sentenced him to serve a term of one year in the Whittier Reform School.
It is claimed that the judgment is void,—1. Because the act upon which it is based is unconstitutional, the *635legislature having failed to express the subject of the act in the title thereof; and 2. Because petitioner was not given a private examination on the question as to whether he ought to be…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Montclair v. RamsdellSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- People ex rel. Drake v. MahaneyMichigan Supreme Court · 1865
- Abeel v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Bright v. McCulloughIndiana Supreme Court · 1866
- Wheeler v. Town of WestportWisconsin Supreme Court · 1872
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by90 opinions
- People v. OlivasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- People v. PeeteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Boone v. KingsburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- Donald Bernard Cunningham v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1958
- People Ex Rel. Chapman v. Sacramento Drainage Dist.California Supreme Court · 1909
85 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.