In re Hinkle
Supreme Court of Kansas
Original Proceedings in Habeas Corpus. Petition filed in this court on January 26,1884, on behalf of George T. Hinkle,-for a writ of habeas corpus.
Read the full summary
Original Proceedings in Habeas Corpus. Petition filed in this court on January 26,1884, on behalf of George T. Hinkle,-for a writ of habeas corpus. The case is submitted upon the following agreed statement of facts: ■ “ It is agreed by and between the plaintiff and the defendant, (the plaintiff by M. W. Sutton and E. H. Gryden, his attorneys, and the defendant by James T. Whitelaw, county attorney of Ford county, and A. J. Abbott and George E. Morgan assisting,) that the court may determine the legality of plaintiff’s restraint upon the following statement of facts, the presence of the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Horton, C. J.:
The justice of the peace issuing the process under which the petitioner is held, was a qualified and acting justice of the peace of Sequoyah county, a municipal township of Ford county, under the provisions of §§ 31 and 32, ch. 72, Laws of 1873, at the time of the passage of the act changing and defining the boundaries of the counties of Hodgeman, Hamilton, Finney, Ford and others, approved February 21, 1883. By § 2 of that act, the county of Finney was formed and bounded in whole or in part of the territory composing the following…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Division of Howard CountySupreme Court of Kansas · 1875
- Borton v. BuckSupreme Court of Kansas · 1871
3Cited by12 opinions
- Harris v. ShanahanSupreme Court of Kansas · 1963
- State Ex Rel. Garland v. GuillorySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1935
- Aikman v. EdwardsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1895
- State v. City of CamdenSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1893
- State v. Shuford.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1901
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.