16.
255
9110
-91
ni paulo woicisimet adeo (90iul! to mindex an
odin” ¦ betondo sth RHDLikingon kadr
ovi.
Jon C9ETJAIL
T
100 ilog i on noque
ei Top Buy
A
.rs viluk nogu an
190 23
a roger
in let,cha, colore"
小
Oval fems.ol
,anolu sau) 2361
NY MA
101 DMJTA MİDust 96 NJ
nosih m
I
e-p
0.800
V hopita
****
Pod da ¿ ni
es... on: 0
10 PRO WAWL ba du
V
Corî min
18:0
#
0 0 ud
no
03 63
DAJIN, JIMMICK » 10* 60% dmete na noge ti ‚AC.sBoytubag
14:3
arrested with the one charged with an offence had been proper-
-ly presented, heard, and determined upon a return to a writ of habeas corpus, the decision being in favor of the one arrested, it might be that the same could be successfully ples -ded to a second arrest. Thus, if in this case it appeared that upon the hearing before Judge Kerr, or upon that before Judge Nelson, the question of identity had been presented and determined in favor of the relator, it would seen that such decision should be final, and that the relator should not
again be called upon to meet that issue. If, however, the person ar rested is released upon habeas corpus upon the ground of informality or mistakes in the proceedings, or upon some ground which does not decide the question whether upon
the real facts the one arrested should be extradited for trial
such release, not being upon the merits, should not be a bar
to an arrest upon perfected papers or proceedings.
I
I
骂
Σ
I
I
*
"To support the plea of res adjudicata the burden was upon the
relator to show that some issue had been heard and determined
in his favor in the prior proceedings, of such a nature as to
constitute an estoppel upon a reinvestigation of the same question. If the record failed to snow the fact, extrinsic evidence was admissible for the purpose. Packet Co. v. Sickles 24 How. 333: U. S. v. Lane, 8 Wall. 185: Cromwell v. Sac Co., 94 U. S. 351-355: Davis v. Brown, Id. 423. In the absence of evidence, either upon the face of the record or from extrinsic sources, showing that the prior discharge from arrest granted the relator was based upon a hearing and determination of some material issue, like that of identity, it cannot be held that anything is shown creating an estoppel against the proceedings now pending for the arrest and removal for trial of the relator. As already stated, these proceedings are based upon new process, beginning with the complaint made before the judge of the municipal court of Eau Claire city, and thus the case is brought within the ruling of the supreme