Legal Opinion

In re Hamilton

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 29, 1915No. Calendar No. 26,765PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Habeas corpus by George E. Hamilton to determine the validity-of a sentence and imprisonment imposed on the petitioner.

1Opinion of the CourtOstrander, J.

Petitioner is imprisoned. He can be held by the warden only by virtue of a .lawful commitment. There was a commitment, and it appears to be agreed that it follows the judgment pronounced by the court. The judgment is:

“That the said George E. Hamilton be confined in the State House of Correction and Branch of the State Prison in the Upper Peninsula, Marquette, Mich., at hard labor, for a period of not less than ten years from and including this day, and the judge thereupon did recommend and state that, in his judgment, the proper maximum penalty would be the term of his natural life as fixed…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. In re CampbellMichigan Supreme Court · 1904
  2. In re RichardsMichigan Supreme Court · 1907
  3. People v. DumasMichigan Supreme Court · 1910
  4. People v. VitaliMichigan Supreme Court · 1909
  5. In re CumminsMichigan Supreme Court · 1904

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. In Re MinnisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  2. Lee Lim v. Davis, WardenUtah Supreme Court · 1929
  3. State ex rel. Petcoff v. ReedSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
  4. Welch v. McDonaldNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1931
  5. In re SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1920

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API