Davis v. Smith
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Habeas corpus; from city court of Wrightsville — Judge Kent. September 15, 1909.
1Opinion of the Court
Powell, J. 1.
That sheriffs, wardens, and other custodians of prisoners may maintain writ of error to review judgments in habeas corpus cases releasing prisoners is well settled in this State. Such cases are in no true sense criminal cases. Hendley v. Adams, 129 Ga. 518 (59 S. E. 227); Livingston v. Livingston, 24 Ga. 379, 383. See also ex parte Tom Tong, 108 U. S. 556 (2 Sup. Ct. 871, 27 L. ed. 826); United States v. Sanges, 144 U. S. 321 (12 Sup. Ct. 609, 36 L. ed.445); Henderson v. James, 52 Ohio, 242 (39 N. E. 805, 27 L. R. A. 290).
2. As to the matters stated in the second headnote, see…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- United States v. SangesSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Ex Parte Tom TongSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Simmons v. Georgia Iron & Coal Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Bailey & Carney Buggy Co. v. GuthrieCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1907
- Livingston v. LivingstonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1858
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Wells v. PridgenSupreme Court of Georgia · 1922
- Aldredge v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1939
- Williams v. Atlanta National BankCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1923
- Sanders v. AldredgeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1939
- In Re BladesIdaho Supreme Court · 1939
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.