Ex Parte Biggs
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
1Opinion of the CourtEdwards, J.
This is an original proceeding in ha-beas corpus. Petitioner alleges he is unlawfully restrained by the chief of police of Oklahoma City; that he was charged in the municipal court with a violation of Ordi nance No. 3944 and amendatory ordinance No. 4596, and was assessed a fine of $19 and in default of payment was committed to the municipal jail. He alleges the amenda-tory ordinance No. 4596, as applied to him, is ex post facto and unconstitutional; that relief may be had by habeas corpus, citing Ex parte Nielsen, 131 U. S. 176, 9 S. Ct. 672, 33 L. Ed. 118. The pertinent part of ordinance…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Ex Parte GarlandSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
- NielsenSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Chicago & Alton Railroad v. TranbargerSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Samuels v. McCurdySupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Gant v. Oklahoma CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1933
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Ex Parte CourterCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1935
- Ex Parte CourterCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1935
- Opinion No., Oklahoma Attorney General Reports2006