BLUMENTHAL v. MUNICIPAL COURT OF CITY OF BEVERLY HILLS

District Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 1, California.

Herman BLUMENTHAL, Petitioner, v. MUNICIPAL COURT OF CITY OF BEVERLY HILLS, Respondent.

Civ. 23989.

Decided: December 23, 1959

Ellis J. Horvitz, Los Angeles, for petitioner. Harold W. Kennedy, County Counsel, and Donald K. Byrne, Deputy County Counsel, Los Angeles, for respondent.

Stanley Mosk, Atty. Gen., and Arthur L. Martin, Deputy Atty. Gen., for amicus curiae.

Petitioner seeks to prohibit further proceedings in the respondent court. He challenges the constitutionality of the statute under which he is charged. After his motion to dismiss was denied by the municipal court, on June 18, 1959, he petitioned the superior court for a writ of prohibition. In that petition he raised the same issue that is presented in his petition before this court. The petition was denied by the superior court.

This presents the same situation that was before this court in Lambert v. Municipal Court, 174 Cal.App.2d 601, 345 P.2d 98. The rule of that case is decisive here.

The alternative writ heretofore issued is discharged and the petition is denied.

SHEA, Justice pro tem.

FOURT, Acting P. J., and LILLIE, J., concur. Hearing denied; WHITE, J., not participating.