Ex parte Fenton (1888) · DecisionDepot

Ex parte Fenton

Name: California Superior Court Tentative Rulings
Creator: DecisionDepot
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

California Supreme Court Oct 3, 1888 No. No. 20471Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. A prior arrest and discharge by a magistrate does not bar a subsequent arrest and examination for the same charge, as jeopardy does not attach until a trial begins before a court of competent jurisdiction.

Issues

Whether a prior arrest and discharge by a magistrate bars a second arrest for the same charge.
At what point does a defendant enter into jeopardy for the purposes of a criminal prosecution.

Disposition. Writ discharged and defendant remanded.

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The fact that defendant had been previously arrested on the same charge, examined before a magistrate, and discharged, is not a bar to a second arrest and examination.”

“A person cannot be said to have been once in jeopardy until he is put upon trial before a court of competent jurisdiction”

Synopsis

Application for a writ of habeas corpus. The peti1'ornv bad once been arrested on a charge of grand larceny. Upon an examination before the committing magistrate, he was discharged. Afterwards he was again arrested on the same charge, examined before a different magistrate, and committed for trial. He thereupon applied to be discharged on habeas corpus, on the ground that he had been once in jeopardy. The further facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

The Court. The record in this case and the agreed statement upon which it is submitted, taken together, show sufficient cause for issuing the warrant under which defendant is held.

[184]The fact that defendant had been previously arrested on the same charge, examined before a magistrate, and discharged, is not a bar to a second arrest and examination.

A person cannot be said to have been once in jeopardy until he is put upon trial before a court of competent jurisdiction, upon indictment or information which is sufficient in form and substance to sustain a conviction, and a jury has been charged with his deliverance.

The writ is discharged, and the defendant remanded to the custody of the sheriff.

Ex parte Fenton

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief