In re Jordan
In the Matter of the Application of JOHN JORDAN for a Writ of Habeas Corpus
- Area
- criminal
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
THE COURT.
The petitioner was given an indeterminate sentence for robbery. The petitioner claims that the sentence is void for uncertainty, citing People v. Sama, 189 Cal. 153 [207 Pac. 893]; People v. Mendosa, 178 Cal. 509 [193 Pac. 998] ; In re Lee, 177 Cal. 690 [171 Pac. 958], and Penal Code, sections 213, 671, and 1168.
The sentence was, in effect, for the maximum term provided by law. (In re Lee, supra.)
*417The maximum term provided by law was life imprisonment.
The petition is denied.
Wilbur, C. J., Myers, J., Seawell, J., Waste, J., and Kerrigan, J., concurred.
Cites, in this corpus
- People v. Sama Crim. No. 2415. · 1922-06-16
- People v. Mendosa Crim. No. 2179. In Bank. · 1918-07-09
- In Re Lee Crim. No. 2126. · 1918-03-08