Case Summary: In the Matter of the Application of CHARLES BROWN on Habeas Corpus

Factual and Procedural Background

This is an application for a writ of habeas corpus directed to the Sheriff of Alameda County. The opinion states that there was evidence sufficiently shown, for the purpose of commitment for trial, that the petitioner received money from another person to hold the same as a bet or wager on a proposed horse race. The opinion notes this was substantially the charge made by the complaint. The matter was decided by the Supreme Court of California, In Bank, on December 2, 1909. The application for a writ was denied.

Legal Issues Presented

1. Whether there was evidence sufficient, for the purpose of commitment for trial, that the petitioner received money to hold as a bet or wager on a proposed horse race.
2. Whether Section 337a of the Penal Code, which makes it a crime to receive money bet or wagered on the result of any trial or contest of speed between men or beasts, applies to the conduct charged and is valid.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court's analysis, as stated in the opinion, proceeded as follows:

• The court found that evidence was shown, for the purpose of commitment for trial, that petitioner received money from another person to hold as a bet or wager on a proposed horse race, and that this conduct was substantially the charge in the complaint.
• The court identified Section 337a of the Penal Code as directly relevant: the statute "in terms makes it a crime for one to receive any money, bet or wagered, or offered for the purpose of being bet or wagered by or for any other person, upon the result of any trial or contest of speed between men or beasts."
• The court concluded that the case falls within the statutory inhibition described in Section 337a and expressed no reason to doubt the validity of the law.
• On that basis, the court denied the application for a writ of habeas corpus.

Holding and Implications

Holding: The application for a writ of habeas corpus is denied.

Implications: The direct consequence is that the petitioner remains subject to the commitment for trial on the charge that he received money to hold as a bet or wager on a proposed horse race under Section 337a of the Penal Code. The opinion does not discuss broader legal implications or the establishment of any new precedent.

Additional Case Information

Docket: Crim. No. 1574.

Court: Supreme Court of California, In Bank.

Date of Decision: December 2, 1909.

Counsel for Petitioner: Carroll Cook, Henry Ach, and M.C. Chapman.