Legal Opinion

Ex parte Farnham

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided December 15, 1877PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Petition for habeas corpus. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtThatcher, C. J.

The judgment of the court was pronounced in due form of law. The warrant of commitment, we must presume, in the silence of the petition, is regular on its face.' The error upon which the relator relies concerns the action of the court, in receiving the verdict. If, as alleged in the petition, the verdict was received, and the jury discharged during the enforced absence of the relator, in jail, we entertain no doubt that the court erred in thereafter pronouncing judgment upon the verdict, and that by writ of error, if the error complained of is apparent of ■record, the judgment would be…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Ex parte KelloggSupreme Court of Vermont · 1834

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Cooper v. People Ex Rel. WyattSupreme Court of Colorado · 1889
  2. Ex parte DegenerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1891
  3. Hart v. BestSupreme Court of Colorado · 1949
  4. Martin v. District CourtSupreme Court of Colorado · 1906
  5. In re PackerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1893

3 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