Humbert v. Dunn
Citations
- 84 Cal. 57
- 24 P. 111
- 1890 Cal. LEXIS 759
Syllabus
<p>Constitutional Law—Appropriation by Legislature — Official Salary — Mandamus. — The constitutional limitation that “ no money shall be drawn from the treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law,” is designed only to secure to the legislative department the exclusive power of deciding to what purpose the public funds shall be devoted in each fiscal year, and no particular form of legislative words is required to make an appropriation valid. An appropriation of an official salary may be prospective, and payable monthly out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated, at the time when the services are performed and the monthly payments become due, and such appropriation may be made in any form of words expressing the intention of the legislature to provide for the payment of the salary as it accrues. Mandamus will lie to compel the controller of state to issue his warrant in payment of a salary so appropriated in the act establishing the office to which the salary is attached.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that the defendant's asking, \When will I need to come back with a lawyer?\ referred to a future intention to seek counsel and was not an unequivocal request for counsel
- holding that the defendant asking, “When will I have to come back with a lawyer?” referred to a future intention to seek counsel and was not an unequivocal request for counsel
- holding that the defendant’s asking, “When will I have to come back with a lawyer?” referred to a future intention to seek counsel and was not an unequivocal request for counsel
- defendant was not in custody at outset of interview, where, inter alia, she voluntarily agreed to ride to police station in front seat of unmarked patrol car
- “Even a comment that a suspect would like counsel to be present in the future is not a clear and unambiguous request for counsel.”
- Miranda warnings required before law enforcement authorities conduct a custodial interrogation
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Paterson
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.