From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Rice

Court of Appeal of California, First District, Division Two
Jun 16, 1938
27 Cal.App.2d 768 (Cal. Ct. App. 1938)

Opinion

Docket No. 2027.

June 16, 1938.

PROCEEDING in Habeas Corpus to secure release from custody on a charge of violating the Insurance Code. Writ denied.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Leon Samuels and Charles H. Brennan for Petitioner.

U.S. Webb, Attorney-General, Neil Cunningham, Deputy Attorney-General, Matthew Brady, District Attorney, and Leslie C. Gillen, Assistant District Attorney, for Respondent.


This is an application for a writ of habeas corpus. With few exceptions the facts are the same as in the proceeding entitled " In the Matter of the Application of Peter P. McDonough for a Writ of Habeas Corpus", Crim. No. 2026, the decision in which was this day filed ( ante, p. 155 [ 80 P.2d 485]). Instead of being one of the proprietors of a bail bond business, this petitioner is an employee of such proprietors, the McDonough Bros. He applied for a license under chapter 8, division 1, part 2 of the Insurance Code to act as an agent and solicitor. His application was denied without notice or a hearing. Otherwise the material facts are the same. The difference in the facts is not sufficient to change the rule. We think the decision mentioned is controlling.

[1] The writ of habeas corpus is discharged and the petitioner is remanded.

Nourse, P.J., and Spence, J., concurred.


Summaries of

In re Rice

Court of Appeal of California, First District, Division Two
Jun 16, 1938
27 Cal.App.2d 768 (Cal. Ct. App. 1938)
Case details for

In re Rice

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Application of HARRY T. RICE for a Writ of Habeas…

Court:Court of Appeal of California, First District, Division Two

Date published: Jun 16, 1938

Citations

27 Cal.App.2d 768 (Cal. Ct. App. 1938)
80 P.2d 491