Legal Opinion

In re Pikulik

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 2, 1892PublishedCited by 13 opinions

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

1Opinion of the Court

Eton, O. J.

The petition for the writ of habeas corpus shows that in January, 1891, in the municipal court of Milwaukee county, the petitioner was convicted of the crime of burglary, as defined in sec. 4408, R. S., and was sentenced by the court to imprisonment in the state prison at hard labor “ for not less than three years nor more than eight years.” The sentence is in the form prescribed by sec. 4733, R. S., as amended by ch. 390, Laws of 1889; that is to say, it is a general or indeterminate sentence. The petitioner is now held in custody under such sentence, and prays that a writ of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People v. CummingsMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
  2. In re GrahamWisconsin Supreme Court · 1889

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Durner v. HueginWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
  2. In re FantonNebraska Supreme Court · 1898
  3. In re NewcombWashington Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Martin v. District CourtSupreme Court of Colorado · 1906
  5. State ex rel. Isenring v. PolacheckWisconsin Supreme Court · 1898

8 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