Long v. Minto
Oregon Supreme Court
From Marion: William Galloway, Judge. Department 2. Statement by Mr. Justice Harris. Upon tbe petition of Tom Garland, an attorney acting for A. M. Long, tbe circuit judge allowed a writ of habeas corpus.
Read the full summary
From Marion: William Galloway, Judge. Department 2. Statement by Mr. Justice Harris. Upon tbe petition of Tom Garland, an attorney acting for A. M. Long, tbe circuit judge allowed a writ of habeas corpus. Tbe petition alleges that Long is unlawfully imprisoned, and that “tbe illegality thereof consists of ” a demand made by the petitioner upon tbe deputy warden, who was in charge of tbe penitentiary in tbe absence of tbe warden, and a refusal of tbe deputy warden to allow Long to have ‘ ‘ a private interview within said penitentiary with his attorney Tom Garland, stating at said time he did…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Harris
1. Both the allowance of the writ of habeas corpus and the procedure governing its prosecution are regulated by statute. "We read in Section 627, L. O. L., that *284“the writ of -habeas corpus ad subjiciendum is the writ herein, designated, and every other writ of habeas corpus is abolished”; and the same section expressly states that every person imprisoned or restrained of his liberty, “except in the cases specified in the next section, may prosecute a writ of habeas corpus according to the provisions of this chapter, to inquire into the cause of such imprisonment or restraint, and if illegal,…
2Cited by15 opinions
- Bartz v. State of OregonOregon Supreme Court · 1992
- Penrod v. CuppOregon Supreme Court · 1978
- Oxman v. Baker CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1925
- Dunn v. JonesNebraska Supreme Court · 1949
- Daugharty v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1959
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.