gno.law

In re Osborne

California Court of Appeal · Crim. No. 142 · 1910-07-06 · Published · 13 Cal. App. 735

In the Matter of the Application of DANIEL E. OSBORNE for Writ of Habeas Corpus

Area
other

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 court is unable to concur in a judgment either for remanding the prisoner or discharging him, and, under article VI, section 4, of the constitution, and upon the authority of Ex parte Oates, 2 Cal. App. xiii, [83 Pac. 261], and Ex parte Sauer, 3 Cal. App. 237, [84 Pac. 995], the writ must be regarded as'denied, and it is so ordered.

It is further ordered, that upon the return of the prisoner to the custody of the sheriff, or upon his resumption of the custody of the prisoner, the order for bail pending the proceedings be discharged, and, if money was deposited by him in lieu of bail, that it be returned to him by the clerk of the court.

Cites, in this corpus