In Re Volpi
California Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING on Habeas Corpus to secure the release of petitioner after conviction under municipal prohibition ordinance. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtFinch, P. J.
Petitioner was convicted under an ordinance of the city of Stockton of selling intoxicating liquor containing more than one-half of one per cent by volume of alcohol and sentenced to pay a fine of $150, with the alternative of imprisonment in the county jail. Failing to pay the fine, he was imprisoned and now seeks release by habeas corpus on the following grounds: 1. That “no power is conferred upon municipalities to enact legislation for the enforcement of the eighteenth amendment, and any penal ordinance by municipalities upon the subject of prohibition or its enforcement is void and in…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- National Prohibition CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Reid v. ColoradoSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Sinnot v. DavenportSupreme Court of the United States · 1859
- In Re HoffmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Commonwealth v. NickersonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Palermo v. Stockton Theatres, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1948
- People v. TomasovichCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
- State v. GauthierSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1922
- In Re PolizzottoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- People v. CapelliCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.