Legal Opinion

Ex parte Miller

California Supreme Court

Decided January 2, 1890No. 20606PublishedCited by 23 opinions

Application for a writ of habeas corpus. The facts stated are in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtWorks, J.

This is an application for a writ of habeas corpus. The principal ground of the application is, that the petitioner, upon a trial for a violation of an ordinance of the board of supervisors of Sutter County, was by the justice’s court denied a jury, and upon a trial by the justice convicted and fined one hundred dollars. The offense charged was not a felony, and a jury might have been waived. The return of the officer to the alternative writ shows a valid commitment by a court having jurisdiction of the subject-matter and of the party. If a jury trial was denied, it was a mere error which…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Kelly v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1886
  2. Ex parte McCulloughCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
  3. Zelle v. McHenrySupreme Court of Iowa · 1879
  4. Ex parte Chin YanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
  5. Turney v. BarrSupreme Court of Iowa · 1888

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Cooley v. WilderAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1932
  2. In re FifeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Ex Parte PlaistridgeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
  4. Oswald v. MartinArizona Supreme Court · 1950
  5. Winnovich v. EmeryUtah Supreme Court · 1908

18 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