VINCENT v. PEOPLE OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 149 U.S. 648 (1893)

Justia Opinion Summary and Annotations
Read more

U.S. Supreme Court

VINCENT v. PEOPLE OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 149 U.S. 648 (1893)

149 U.S. 648

VINCENT
v.
PEOPLE OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

No. 1,316.

May 15, 1893.

Page 149 U.S. 648, 649

W. H. H. Hart, Atty. Gen. Cal., for the motion.

Carroll Cook and G. R. B. Hayes, opposed.

Mr. Chief Justice FULLER.

This case, which will be found reported in 95 Cal. 425, 30 Pac. Rep. 581, differs in no essential respect from that of McNulty, just considered. 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 959. For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion, the writ of error must be dismissed.


U.S. Supreme Court

VINCENT v. PEOPLE OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 149 U.S. 648 (1893)

149 U.S. 648

VINCENT
v.
PEOPLE OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

No. 1,316.

May 15, 1893.

Page 149 U.S. 648, 649

W. H. H. Hart, Atty. Gen. Cal., for the motion.

Carroll Cook and G. R. B. Hayes, opposed.

Mr. Chief Justice FULLER.

This case, which will be found reported in 95 Cal. 425, 30 Pac. Rep. 581, differs in no essential respect from that of McNulty, just considered. 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 959. For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion, the writ of error must be dismissed.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.

Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.