Ex Parte Riley
Ex Parte George Riley, on Habeas Corpus.
- Proceeding
- original
- Outcome
- writ denied — Petition denied.
- Area
- criminal
- Panel
- The Court (author)
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
Petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner was convicted of violating a county ordinance and sentenced to pay a fine of thirty dollars, or to serve fifteen days in the county jail. He contends that the judgment is void because it does not admit of satisfaction by payment of so much of the fine as is not satisfied by imprisonment at the rate of two dollars a day. It does not, in terms, provide that it may be so satisfied, but we think that is its effect. Whenever it is made to appear that petitioner has paid so much of his fine as remains unsatisfied by imprisonment at two dollars a day he will be entitled to his discharge.
Petition denied.
Cited by
- In Re Huewitt Docket No. 1095. · 1929-11-15
- In Re Cohen Docket No. Crim. 2829. · 1926-02-25
- In Re Glavich Docket No. 878. · 1925-08-12
- People v. Magoni Docket No. 830. · 1925-06-01
- Matter of Application of Robbins Crim. No. 313. · 1915-06-17