In Re Castueras
In the Matter of Application of Al Castueras for a Writ of Habeas Corpus.
- Proceeding
- original
- Outcome
- other — J.
- Area
- other
- Panel
- Nathaniel P. Conrey (author), Frederick W. Houser, York
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion — Conrey
CONREY, P. J., and HOUSER, J.
It appearing from a consideration of the petition for the writ, and from the return to the writ heretofore issued herein, that the complaint filed in the justice’s court did not state facts sufficient to constitute a public offense, and it further appearing that, *16 for the reason above stated, the commitment under which petitioner is held in custody is void, it is ordered that the petitioner be discharged from custody. (Pen. Code, sec. 647, subd. 7.)
Dissent — York
YORK, J., Dissenting.
I dissent.
I dissent for the reason that the complaint herein alleges that the defendant “was then and there an idle person and did then and there lodge in an outhouse of the Biltmore Hotel, without the permission of the owner”. There was no demurrer interposed, and it is my opinion that the allegation that it was without the permission of the owner would presume, in the absence of a demurrer, that it was without the permission of the person entitled to possession, by reason of the fact that the owner, unless the contrary is alleged or proved, is entitled to the possession of property. It would take evidence to show that the owner of property was not entitled to possession of property owned.