Legal Opinion

Ex parte Hollis

California Supreme Court

Decided July 15, 1881No. 10,652PublishedCited by 54 opinions

Application for discharge upon writ of habeas corpus.

1Opinion of the Court

McKee, J.:

This is an application on habeas corpus to be discharged from imprisonment under a commitment issued upon a judgment, in proceedings for contempt, rendered by the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, against the petitioner.

Of the office and effect of a writ of habeas corpus, under our system of jurisprudence, there can not be, at this day, much question. It has been, indeed, contended that after *407judgment in a criminal case of a Court of competent jurisdiction a prisoner can not be discharged on habeas corpus, because the judgment is conclusive. Of course, where a…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Ex Parte SieboldSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
  2. People Ex Rel. Tweed v. . LiscombNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
  3. Smith v. MasonSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
  4. Ex parte KearnyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  5. People ex rel. Mulford v. TurnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1850

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by54 opinions

  1. Hotaling v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  2. McClatchy v. Superior Court of SacramentoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Safer v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  4. Ex parte Ah MenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  5. Miskimmins v. ShaverWyoming Supreme Court · 1899

49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API