Legal Opinion

In Re Weintraub

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 9, 1943No. Crim. 1856PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.

By means of habeas corpus the petitioner, appearing in proper person, seeks to obtain his release from custody as a prisoner at Folsom State Prison. He contends that he was convicted, without due process of law, of the misdemeanor of having in his possession “a preparation of morphine” without having procured a physician’s pre scription. therefor, contrary to the provisions of section 11160 of the Health and Safety Code, with relation to the nse of narcotics. He claims that the lack of due process consisted of pronouncing sentence against him in his absence and in the absence of his attorney,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. In Re LeeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
  2. In Re ConnorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
  3. People v. SamaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  4. In Re GutierrezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
  5. In Re MaldonadoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Duffy, Warden v. WellsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1953
  2. In Re WardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
  3. In Re HarrisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947

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

Powered by the Exa API