In Re Hinman
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
FRAMPTON, J. pro tem. *
Habeas corpus to review a judgment of imprisonment for contempt.
We will confine this opinion to matters relating to Count III of the order to show cause for the reasons hereinafter stated.
The petitioner’s principal point in attacking the validity of the judgment, as it relates to Count III, is that he was charged in a single count with three possible contempts and that by reason thereof he was unable to prepare his defense, that he was not apprised of the precise charge against him and, therefore, would be unable to properly plead double jeopardy in the event a further…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Warner v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- In Re PearsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
3Cited by3 opinions
- Noorthoek v. Superior Court of San Luis Obispo Cty.California Court of Appeal · 1969
- In Re JonesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
- People v. HinmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967