Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta In re Waite 32 Cal. App. 801

← Cases

In re Waite

32 Cal. App. 801 Court Second Appellate District. Decision date 1916-11-11 Docket Crim. No. 520 English

Delivered by JAMES, J.

Contents

Majority

p. 801
[Crim. No. 520.
Second Appellate District.
November 11, 1916.]
In re E. R. WAITE on Habeas Corpus.

Headnote

County Ordinance—Penalty.—Writ of habeas corpus discharged on the authority of People v. Pages, ante, p. 37.
APPLICATION for a Writ of Habeas Corpus.
The facts are similar to those stated in People v. Pages, ante, p. 37.
Allison & Dickson, for Petitioner.
T. W. Duckworth, District Attorney, and John L. Campbell, Deputy District Attorney, for Respondent.

The ground upon which petitioner seeks to be discharged from custody is that the ordinance of the board of supervisors of the county of San Bernardino, under which he was convicted, is void because the maximum punishment therein provided is in excess of the power of the local legislative body to prescribe. The argument to that point has been given full consideration in the opinion filed this day in the case of People v. Jean Fages, Crim. No. 504, ante, p. 37, where the decision is adverse to the appellant’s contention. In deciding this application it will be sufficient to refer to that case for the views of the court on the question presented.

The writ is discharged and the petitioner remanded to the custody of the sheriff of San Bernardino County.

Conrey, P. J., and Shaw, J., concurred.