Legal Opinion

Ex Parte Apakean

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 15, 1923No. Crim. No. 1149PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSt. Sure, J.

The petitioner, charged with the crime of felony, to wit, grand larceny, seeks his discharge upon a writ of habeas corpus. He alleges in his petition that he was arraigned upon said charge upon the fourth day of May, 1923; that upon the seventeenth day of May, 1923, he entered a plea of not guilty; that thereafter, and on June 16, 1923, the cause was set for trial for the twenty-fifth day of July, 1923; that on said twenty-fifth day of July, 1923, when the cause was called for trial, petitioner appeared with his counsel and answered “ready”; that the district attorney requested and obtained a…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. HawkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Silcox v. LangCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  3. Ex parte FennessyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  4. People v. FitzgeraldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. People v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Randolph v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1954
  3. People v. WilliamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
  4. State v. VigilNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1973
  5. People v. MitsunagaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928

16 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