From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ex parte Sin

Supreme Court of California
Jan 1, 1880
54 Cal. 102 (Cal. 1880)

Opinion

         Application to be admitted to bail on writ of habeas corpus.

         COUNSEL:

         Davis Louderback, for Petitioner.


         JUDGES: In bank, Thornton, J. Morrison, C. J., Myrick, J., McKinstry, J., Ross, J., Sharpstein, J., and McKee, J., concurred.

         OPINION

          THORNTON, Judge

         The prisoner was arrested in the City and County of San Francisco, on a warrant issued by a Justice of the Peace of the County of Sacramento, upon a charge of grand larceny; and is now in the custody of the arresting officer, whose duty it is to take her before the magistrate who issued the warrant, or some magistrate of the same county, without any unnecessary delay.          We have examined the clauses of the Constitution of this State, (in sec. 6, art. 1, and sec. 4, art. 6) and the sections of the Penal Code (§§ 811, 818, 819, 821, 822, 824, 931, 936, 943, 981, 982, 1268, 1271, 1273, 1490, 1491, 1492) referred to on the argument, and are all of opinion, the charge being a felony, that in order to procure bail under the Constitution and statutes referred to, the prisoner should be taken before the magistrate by whom the warrant was issued, or some magistrate of the County of Sacramento. ( Penal Code, § 821.)

         It follows from the above that the application to this Court to be admitted to bail must be denied, and the prisoner is remanded to the custody of the arresting officer.


Summaries of

Ex parte Sin

Supreme Court of California
Jan 1, 1880
54 Cal. 102 (Cal. 1880)
Case details for

Ex parte Sin

Case Details

Full title:Ex parte HUNG SIN alias AH FONG CHI

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Jan 1, 1880

Citations

54 Cal. 102 (Cal. 1880)

Citing Cases

People v. Johnson

The fact that while a complaint was pending against the defendant before one magistrate he was taken before…