TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Ex Parte Story

Ex Parte J. O. Story.

Ex Parte Story, 1942 OK CR 163, 131 P.2d 773
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · State Appellate Courts
Decided
December 2, 1942
Docket
No. A-10340.
Judges
Barefoot, Doyle, Jones
Citations
131 P.2d 7731942 OK CR 16375 Okla. Crim. 3671942 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 60
Cited by 9

Opinion of the Court — Barefoot

BAREFOOT, P. J.

Petitioner, J. O. Story, has filed in this court, on October 7, 1942, what is termed “Petition for Review in Error”. There being no* such pleading known to this court, it has been filed and will be titled as a petition for writ of habeas corpus.

This petitioner, J. O. Story, who is John 0. Story, was charged, tried and convicted of the crime of murder in the district court of Bryan county on the 18th day of October, 1939, and was sentenced to serve a life term in the state penitentiary at McAlester for the killing of his wife, Ethel Story. He is now confined in the State Penitentiary. His case was appealed to this court and oral argument was had thereon on two different occasions. An opinion was rendered by this court on the 17th day of December, 1941, in which the judgment and sentence of the district court of Bryan county was affirmed. Story v. State, 73 Okla. Cr. 273 , 120 P. 2d 387 . In the hearings on the appeal in this case, careful consideration was given by the court to all alleged errors presented in the trial thereof. The petition is based upon these alleged errors and many affidavits have been filed by petitioner with reference to' the evidence presented, and evidence which he claims was not presented. This court, in conformity with the rules many times heretofore announced, cannot examine the weight of the evidence or the sufficiency thereof on habeas corpus. It is only when the judgment and sentence is void that relief may be given.

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

*369 For the reasons above stated, tbe 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.

DOYLE and JONES, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 9 cases

View all citing references →
1942: 21945: 11947: 21950: 11952: 11955: 219422026peak 1942 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Story v. Burford, Warden178 F.2d 911 (10th Cir. 1950)
  2. In re Habeas Corpus of Brewster1955 OK CR 69, 284 P.2d 755
  3. In re Wright1942 OK CR 171, 132 P.2d 351
  4. In re Story1945 OK CR 19, 156 P.2d 154
  5. In re Habeas Corpus of Williams1955 OK CR 70, 284 P.2d 1034
  6. Ex Parte Story1947 OK CR 23, 178 P.2d 112

Most recent

  1. In re Habeas Corpus of Williams1955 OK CR 70, 284 P.2d 1034
  2. In re Habeas Corpus of Brewster1955 OK CR 69, 284 P.2d 755
  3. Story v. Waters195 F.2d 734 (10th Cir. 1952)
  4. Story v. Burford, Warden178 F.2d 911 (10th Cir. 1950)
  5. Ex Parte Story1947 OK CR 127, 184 P.2d 983
  6. Ex Parte Story1947 OK CR 23, 178 P.2d 112

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
Story v. State, 1941 OK CR 185, 120 P.2d 387 11

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