Case Name: Ex Parte BELL
Court: Supreme Court of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1893-10-18
Citations: 4 Cal. Unrep. 309
Docket Number: 
Parties: Ex Parte BELL.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Unreported Cases
Volume: 4
Pages: 309–310

Head Matter:
Ex Parte BELL.
October 18, 1893.
34 Pac. 641.
Larceny—Jurisdiction of Superior Court.—Where a defendant is convicted in the superior court of petit larceny, on an information which charges him with grand larceny, he may be confined in the county jail under such conviction, though the superior court has no jurisdiction of petit larceny, since the charge of grand larceny gave the court jurisdiction, and Penal Code, section 1159, authorizes a conviction of petit larceny when grand larceny is charged.
Application by Charles Bell for a writ of habeas corpus, alleging that he was illegally imprisoned under a conviction of petit larceny. Denied.
P. E. & Robt. A. King for petitioner.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The petitioner was accused by information of the crime of grand larceny, and, after a trial in the superior court, convicted of petit larceny. His imprisonment in the county jail upon that conviction is alleged to be unlawful, because the superior court has no jurisdiction of petit larceny. But the charge of grand larceny gave the superior court jurisdiction, and the statute authorizes a conviction of petit larceny, when grand larceny is charged: Pen. Code, sec. 1159. Writ denied.