In Re Kaster
California Court of Appeal
APPLICATION for a Writ of Habeas Corpus to secure release after conviction of violation of Motor Vehicle Act. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
ANDERSON, P. J., pro tem.
Petitioner was convicted in the justice’s court of American township of Sacramento County by a jury of a misdemeanor arising under the “Vehicle Act” (Laws 1915, p. 397), in that the defendant did “unlawfully drive and operate an automobile upon the public highway at an excessive rate of speed, to wit, in excess of thirty-five miles per hour,” etc. The defendant was thereupon sentenced to be confined in the Sacramento County jail for a period of sixty days with no alternative.
Petitioner contends that the justice’s court did not have jurisdiction of the person of…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Mahon v. JusticeSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Ex parte Ah MenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Ex parte KearnyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Matter of RuefCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- State v. RossSupreme Court of Iowa · 1866
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- In Re Application of LunaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- In Re GutierrezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
- In Re BottjerIdaho Supreme Court · 1927
- In Re EdwardsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
- In Re MoffettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.