TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

In re Wright

In Re Pat Wright.

In re Wright, 1942 OK CR 171, 132 P.2d 351
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · State Appellate Courts
Decided
December 16, 1942
Docket
No. A-10355.
Judges
Barefoot, Jones, Doyle
Citations
132 P.2d 3511942 OK CR 17175 Okla. Crim. 4001942 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 68

Opinion of the Court — Barefoot

BAREFOOT, P. J.

Petitioner, Pat Wright, has filed in this court his petition for habeas corpus, alleging that he is unlawfully detained, confined, and restrained of his *401 liberty, by Fred Hunt, Warden of tbe State Penitentiary, at McAlester. Attached to bis petition are certain copies of letters, copy of tbe complaint, information, and judgment and sentence filed in tbe district court of Pottawatomie county. No evidence bas been offered in support of tbe allegations of tbe petition. A demurrer to tbe petition bas been filed by tbe Attorney General on bebalf of tbe warden of tbe penitentiary, and also a response.

It is unnecessary to give a detailed statement of tbe allegations set forth in tbe petition. They are only recitals with reference to tbe arrest, and plea of guilty entered by tbe defendant to a charge of second-degree burglary entered against petitioner in tbe district court of Pottawatomie county, and with reference to bis arrest in tbe State of Arkansas, and subsequent transfer to Oklahoma to answer tbe charges against him in this; state. There is nothing in the petition, or tbe exhibits attached thereto', which reveals that tbe court acted without jurisdiction, or that tbe judgment and sentence entered was void.

In tbe recent case of In re Story, 75 Okla. Cr. 367 , 131 P. 2d 773 , we said:

“This court on habeas corpus will not look beyond tbe judgment and sentence of any court of competent jurisdiction as to mere irregularities of procedure or errors in law on questions over which tbe court bad jurisdiction. Tbe writ of habeas corpus cannot be used to perform tbe office of a writ of error on appeal, and should be limited to', cases in which tbe judgment and sentence of tbe court attacked is clearly void”.

As we have so often announced, petitioner’s only opportunity for relief is from tbe Governor of tbe state, in whom tbe Constitution bas placed the power of pardon and parole.

*402 For the reasons above stated, the demurrer of the Attorney General, filed in behalf of the warden of the penitentiary, is sustained, and the petition for writ of habeas corpus, is denied.

JONES, J., concurs. DOYLE, J., absent.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1944: 11951: 21953: 11958: 119442026peak 1951 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. De Wolf v. State1953 OK CR 49, 256 P.2d 191
  2. Ex Parte Wright1944 OK CR 10, 145 P.2d 772
  3. In re Schechter1951 OK CR 61, 231 P.2d 411
  4. Ex Parte Thompson1951 OK CR 121, 235 P.2d 955
  5. In re the Habeas Corpus of Young1958 OK CR 31, 325 P.2d 85

Most recent

  1. In re the Habeas Corpus of Young1958 OK CR 31, 325 P.2d 85
  2. De Wolf v. State1953 OK CR 49, 256 P.2d 191
  3. Ex Parte Thompson1951 OK CR 121, 235 P.2d 955
  4. In re Schechter1951 OK CR 61, 231 P.2d 411
  5. Ex Parte Wright1944 OK CR 10, 145 P.2d 772

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Ex Parte Story, 1942 OK CR 163, 131 P.2d 773 9

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list