In re Landowitz
Opinion
22 Cal.App.2d 733 (1937)
In the Matter of the Application of CARL LANDOWITZ for a Writ of Habeas Corpus.
Crim. No. 1972.
California Court of Appeals. First Appellate District, Division One.
September 14, 1937.
Edward B. Dienstag and I. M. Peckham for Petitioner.
Matthew Brady, District Attorney, and William J. Connolly, Assistant District Attorney, for Respondent.
Walter McGovern, Amicus Curiae on Behalf of Respondent.
Memorandum The Court.
[1] The questions presented in the above matter are essentially the same as those decided in In re Kazas, an application for a writ of habeas corpus, ante, p. 161 [70 PaCal.2d 962]; and on the authority thereof the petitioner is discharged.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.