McMahon v. Mead
South Dakota Supreme Court
Application for writ of habeas corpus, on the relation of Nellie McMahon, against L. C: Mead, Superintendent of the State Hospital for the Insane. No evidence is presented that she has shown any indication of insanity in the last four months, since the hearing before Judge Tripp. Dr. Mead has found no evidence of insanity in her demeanor since she entered the institution. If this does not indicate sanity at present how will we ever establish it? Constitutionality of law.
Read the full summary
Application for writ of habeas corpus, on the relation of Nellie McMahon, against L. C: Mead, Superintendent of the State Hospital for the Insane. No evidence is presented that she has shown any indication of insanity in the last four months, since the hearing before Judge Tripp. Dr. Mead has found no evidence of insanity in her demeanor since she entered the institution. If this does not indicate sanity at present how will we ever establish it? Constitutionality of law. The present law is unconstitutional because it does not guarantee a hearing before conviction; because it does not…
1Opinion of the CourtAvhiting, J.
The relator is an inmate of the South Dakota State Hospital, a public institution devoted to the care and treatment of the insane. The respondent is the superintendent of such hospital, and has had the relator under his care and custody under and by virtue of a warrant of commitment issued by the commissioners of insanity of Meade county, S. D., under date of October 25, 1911, which warrant recites, among other things, that the commissioners had found relator to be insane. Upon a petition filed on behalf of relator, which petition sets forth the above facts, and alleges “That this plaintiff…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Ex Parte Tom TongSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Perry v. McLendonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1879
- DowdellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1897
- Matter of LambertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Chavannes v. PriestleySupreme Court of Iowa · 1890
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- McCleskey v. ZantSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Higgins v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1953
- Wells, by Gillig v. Attorney General of the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1953
- Ex Parte WattSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1950
- Barber v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1958
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.