California Supreme Court, 1886

Ex parte Mitchell

California Supreme Court · Decided May 28, 1886

70 Cal. 1; 11 P. 488; 1886 Cal. LEXIS 707

Cases that cite this one

9 later published cases cite this decision.

People v. Anderson (Cal. 1972)
People v. Wingo (Cal. 1975)
Leifert v. Turkington (Conn. 1932)
In re Johnson (Cal. Ct. App. 1907)
Hoban v. Rice (Ohio Ct. App. 1970)
Wallace v. White (Me. 1916)
People v. Puente (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico 1908)
In re Sullivan (Cal. Ct. App. 1906)
People v. Morris (Mich. 1890)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

The Court.

1. The punishment authorized by section 245, Penal Code, is not excessive, cruel, or unusual within the meaning of section 6, article 1, of the constitution.

2. People v. Turner, 65 Cal. 540, to which we adhere, disposes of the second point made for petitioner.

*33. The entire judgment is not void. . That portion of it providing for imprisonment as a means of enforcing the payment of the fine is separable from the rest. The sentence to imprisonment as a punishment is in force, and the petitioner cannot now be discharged, whatever may hereafter be his rights regarding the order of imprisonment as to the fine. Whether he will be entitled to a discharge on the expiration of the two years, we indicate no opinion.

The petitioner is remanded, and the writ discharged.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.