Legal Opinion

Lambert v. California

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided January 27, 1958No. 47PublishedCited by 829 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Douglas

Section 52.38 (a) of the Los Angeles Municipal Code defines “convicted person” as follows:

“Any person who, subsequent to January 1, 1921, has been or hereafter is convicted of an offense punishable as a felony in the State of California, or who has been or who is hereafter convicted of any offense in any place other than the State of California, which offense, if committed in the State of California, would have been punishable as a felony.”

Section 52.39 provides that it shall be unlawful for “any convicted person” to be or remain in Los Angeles for a period of more than five days without…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
  2. United States v. HarrissSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
  3. United States v. DotterweichSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  4. United States v. BalintSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  5. Walker v. City of HutchinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1956

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

3Cited by829 opinions

  1. Ring v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  2. Griffin v. WisconsinSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. Smith v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  4. United States v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
  5. Cheek v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1991

824 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