Legal Opinion

People ex rel. Rothensies v. Searles

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided May 16, 1930PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Per curiam

No doubt the proper method of obtaining relief from excessive bail in either civil or criminal actions is by a writ *604of habeas corpus. (Jones v. Kelly, 17 Mass. 116; Whiting v. Putnam, Id. 174; Evans v. Foster, 1 N. H. 374; United States v. Brawner, 7 Fed. 86.) The theory is that the defendant (relator herein) is unlawfully imprisoned.

The purpose of requiring the defendant to give bail after.arrest is to secure his presence at the trial. The amount necessary for that purpose is a question of sound discretion and judgment depending upon several primary conditions that may be present in any…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Ex parte TayloeNew York Supreme Court · 1825
  2. Ex parte DuncanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1879
  3. People v. Van HorneNew York Supreme Court · 1850
  4. United States v. BrawnerDistrict Court, W.D. Tennessee · 1881
  5. In Re MartinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. People ex rel. Klein v. KruegerNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
  2. People Ex Rel. Lobell v. McDonnellNew York Court of Appeals · 1947
  3. United Press Associations v. ValenteAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1953
  4. People Ex Rel. Rao v. AdamsNew York Court of Appeals · 1947
  5. Allen v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1976

8 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