The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1897-12-03
Judge de Haven Washes
His Hands of Him for
All Time.
Decision That The State Su-
preme Court Has Granted
the Relief Asked.
The Action of the Superior Court of
San Diego Is Declared Null and
Void.

United States District Judge de Haven
took common sense view of the petition
in habeas corpus on behalf of Murderer
Ebanks and dismissed the writ yesterday.
Warden Hale produced the prisoner in
court in charge OF Deputy Warden, and
the prisoner occupied a front seat behind
| Mr.. Deuprey, whose collar was higher and
whose manner was more i'm pressive than
usual. Ebanks is a coffee-and IN ilk- col
ored West Indian with straight hair and
black, beady eyes. His crime was
peculiarly atrocious, he having murdered
in cold blood. with motives of robbery, an
aged couple camped on the beach in San
Diego County.
The proceedings began by the reading
of the return of Warden Hale to the sum-
mons under the writ. The return was in
the nature OF protesting argument on
the line laid down by Mr.. Carter on the
dav before.
Mr. Deuprey followed with statement
disparaging the logic and deploring the
lack of lega! acumen in the return. Then
tie proceeded TO say that The order OF the
Superior Court OF San Diego, made on
November s. 1897, Wa, Illegal ana void.
After the preliminary statement Judge
de Ravens opinion goes on to say, sub
slantlally:
Notwithstanding the tendency of the petit
toner's appeal, The Superior Court of the
County OF san Diego on the 9th day of Novem-
Der of the present year made an order direct
ing the Sheriff Of said county TO deliver The
petitioner to ". Z. Hale. Warden of the State
prison al san Quentin, and directing the salo
Warden to carry in to execution the judgment
by infiIcting upon him. on the Sd day of De-
Gem Der. 1897, the penalty OF death
The validity OF this last order only is as
sailed by the present proceeding, in which
the petitioner seeks by habeas corpus to be
discharged from imprisonment and other pun
ishment directed 10y such order.
As already stated, the effect OF the petition
er's appeal from the decision of tbs court
upon his former application Tor a writ of
ha beas corpus Vas 10 stay all PROCEEDINGS in
the Stale courts upon the judgment thereto
fore rendered by Il until the matter involved
Z in said appeal was disposed of by the final
judgment OF the Supreme Court of the Uuited
States, and 1t necessarily follows tnereirom
that the order OF The Superior Court of San
Diego Couu ty directing the execution OF the
petitioner. while said appeal was still pending
IN The Supreme Court OF the United Sta les i.
waS given without jurisdiction and Is ebso-
lutely void aud II carried into effect would
de DrlVe the petitioner OF the right 10 have the
judgment OF inns court in the matter of his
iCrmer petition for VIII OF haheas corpus re-
viewed by the Supreme Court of the United
States-a right which Is GuaranIeefto him by
the laws of the United States.
1t is admitted b. the attorney Tor the petit
I toner tina since the issuance of the WRIT of
this state, which equally with this court is
charged with the duty Of guarding and pro-
tecting all rights secured TO the citizen by
the cOnsttu ZION OF the United States, has
made an order staying for the present all pro-
ceedings under the order OF the superior Court
OF the county of San Diego directing the execu-
| ton of the petitioner on the Sd inst. This, in
! effect, operates TO nuli1fy the order under
which the petitioners life put in je =
pardy and secures TO him all the p-otec hon
/ which this court would, upon the facts alleged
/ in the petition, be authorized TO give in the
! present proce eding.
| The petitioner is not entitled to be restored
/ to his liberty and the action OF the Supreme
! Court OF the State just referred 10 makes 1t un-
/ necessary for this court 10 make any further
order in the premises or longer continue in
: force the writ OF he oeas corpus under wnich
| the petitioner has been brough, before the
J court
/ The writ will be discharged and the petitioner
/ be remarked 10 the custody whence he came.
/ Mr.. Deuprey excepted to The judgment
/ of the court and asked for PERMISSION 20
/ file an appeal from the judgment TO the
/ Supreme Court of the y nted States.
! This was denied. JUICE II. de Haven re-
marking that if he were to allow an ap-
/ peal in the m after he would SUBJECT him
1 self to a reprimand from that august body.