In re Ring
California Supreme Court
The petitioner, Edward Ring, was indicted in San Mateo County. The case was transferred to the District Court for trial. On the 23d of March, 1865, the defendant was found guilty by a jury of the crime of manslaughter. The next day he was sentenced by the Court to imprisonment in the State Prison for the term of three years.
Read the full summary
The petitioner, Edward Ring, was indicted in San Mateo County. The case was transferred to the District Court for trial. On the 23d of March, 1865, the defendant was found guilty by a jury of the crime of manslaughter. The next day he was sentenced by the Court to imprisonment in the State Prison for the term of three years. The Clerk entered in the minutes of the Court the judgment of the Court in. the following form : “The People v. Edivard Ping, March term, 1865. The defendant, Edward Ring, having beep convicted of the crime of manslaughter, and the hour having arrived for pronouncing…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Sanderson, C. J.
Two questions are presented: First, is the principle of res adjudicata applicable to proceedings on habeas corpus; and, second, is the process or judgment under which the .petitioner is held in custody so defective in some matter of substance required by law as to render it void ?
I. Under the old Constitution it was held in Ex parte PerMns, 2 Cal. 429, that a decision upon a habeas corpus was not appealable or subject to review, and that the doctrine of res adjudicata has no application to such a case. The late amendments to the Constitution have made no change…
2Cited by31 opinions
- In Re ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
- In Re TrombleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- Ex parte GibsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- State ex rel. Jackson v. KennieMontana Supreme Court · 1900
- In Re BasuinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.