Ex parte Wolters
California Supreme Court
Application for writ of habeas corpus. The ordinance imposing the license in this case was passed by virtue of the Act of the legislature of March 14,1883, known as the County Government Act. There ivas nothing to indicate whether it was for the purpose of revenue, or regulation, or for both. The other facts appear in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMorrison, C. J.
The defendant was convicted of a mis-r demeanor, in violating order 8 of the board of supervisors of Butte County, and fined in the sum of one hundred and fifty dollars. He was charged with carrying on the business of retailing spirituous liquors without having first procured a license for that purpose, as required by order 8 of the board of supervisors of the proper county.
It was claimed, on the hearing of the petitioner’s application for a discharge on habeas corpus, that the order of the board of supervisors, imposing the license in question, is in violation of certain provisions of the…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Inre Yick WoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
- In re GuerreroCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Ex Parte RoachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- In re LawrenceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- County of Monterey v. AbbottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.