Ex parte Bird
Citations
- 19 Cal. 130
Syllabus
<p>Ex parte Andrews, (18 Cal.) holding the Act of 1861, commonly called the “ Sunday Law,” to be constitutional, affirmed.</p> <p>Where a party was charged with keeping open a bar for the sale of liquors on Sunday, in violation of the Act of 1861, and was convicted and committed to custody, and applied to the Supreme Court for a writ of habeas corpus, claiming his discharge on the ground that he kept the bar as part of the business of a hotel, and therefore had not violated the law : Held, that petitioner cannot avail himself of this defense, on this application, but must adopt some other mode—the complaint against him not showing that the bar was kept as part of the hotel business.</p> <p>On habeas corpus it is not competent to retry issues of fact, or to review the proceedings of a legal trial. .</p>
Judges: Baldwin
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
9 cases in this archive cite this case.
- In Re McVickersCalifornia Supreme Court· 1946-12-03· cited 162×
- In Re LindleyCalifornia Supreme Court· 1947-02-18· cited 158×
- Rodriguez v. Bureau of CorrectionsSupreme Court of The Virgin Islands· 2013-04-29· cited 31×
- Ex Parte KoserCalifornia Supreme Court· 1882-03-10· cited 27×
- N. & W. R. R. v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia· 1892-06-25· cited 11×
- Ex parte LehmkuhlCalifornia Supreme Court· 1887-02-17· cited 10×
- Ex Parte FedderwitzCalifornia Supreme Court· 1900-11-26· cited 10×
- Ex parte BurkCalifornia Supreme Court· 1881-10-31
- Knapp v. ThomasOhio Supreme Court· 1883-01-15
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.