In Re Garrison

California Court of Appeal Jan 14, 1937 No. Crim. No. 1944Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the ordinance under which the petitioner was restrained is not unconstitutional on the grounds asserted in the petition.

Issues

Whether the ordinance under which the petitioner is restrained is unconstitutional.

Disposition. Denied

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“in our opinion it is not unconstitutional upon the grounds urged in the petition.”

18 Cal.App.2d 495 (1937) In the Matter of the Application of GEORGE R. ANDERSEN on Behalf of PETER GARRISON for a Writ of Habeas Corpus.

Crim. No. 1944. California Court of Appeals. First Appellate District, Division One.

January 14, 1937. George R. Andersen for Petitioner. [496]

The Court.

[1] We have examined the ordinance for a violation of which petitioner claims he is being restrained of his liberty and in our opinion it is not unconstitutional upon the grounds urged in the petition.

The application is accordingly denied.

In Re Garrison

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief