Webb v. State

Decision Date28 March 1983
Docket NumberNo. PC-83-105,PC-83-105
PartiesAlwyn R. WEBB, Appellant, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee.
CourtUnited States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Alwyn R. Webb, pro se.

Jan Eric Cartwright, Atty. Gen., and Robert H. Macy, Dist. Atty., Oklahoma City, for appellee.

ORDER AFFIRMING DENIAL OF POST-CONVICTION RELIEF

The appellant was charged, tried and convicted of Second Degree Murder, Case No. CRF-81-3505, Oklahoma County, and sentenced to 14 years' imprisonment in the State Penitentiary. The appellant now alleges that he was improperly denied post-conviction relief by the District Court, where he alleged five (5) grounds of error. He now alleges eight (8) grounds of error.

After a review of the record, this Court finds that the appellant has not yet perfected an appeal of his conviction or sought an appeal out of time from the District Court, which this Court has held as requisite to filing of an application for post-conviction relief. In Maines v. State, 597 P.2d 774 (Okl.Cr.1979), this Court denied such an application when the appellant failed to explain his failure to file an appeal before applying for post-conviction relief. Where the appellant has apparently been advised of his rights to appeal, he may not by-pass the appeal stage for post-conviction relief. Exceptions are provided, however, in 22 O.S.1981, § 1086, which states:

All grounds for relief available to an applicant under this act must be raised in his original, supplemental or amended application. Any ground finally adjudicated or not so raised, or knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waived in the proceeding that resulted in the conviction or sentence or in any other proceeding the applicant has taken to secure relief may not be the basis for a subsequent application, unless the court finds a ground for relief asserted which for sufficient reason was not asserted or was inadequately raised in the prior application.

In Maines, this Court held that Section 1086 bars relief on issues raised in a post-conviction application which clearly could have been raised on a direct appeal. Furthermore, permitting one to bypass or waive a timely and direct appeal and proceed under Section 1080 without supplying sufficient reasons erodes the limitations and undermines the purpose of the statutory direct appeal under 22 O.S.1981, § 1051. This Court then held that the appellant must furnish sufficient reasons for his failure to appeal "in order to proceed to adjudication of the merits...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • Bowen v. Board of Retirement
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • 25 Septiembre 1986
    ... ... State Board of Education (1962) 57 Cal.2d 167, 176, 18 Cal.Rptr. 369, 367 P.2d 865; Flint v. Sacramento County Employees' Retirement Assn. (1985) 164 ... ...
  • Cone v. Dutton
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit
    • 29 Noviembre 1993
    ...not pursue an appeal of these issues and therefore is procedurally barred from post-conviction relief under Oklahoma law. See Webb v. Oklahoma, 661 P.2d 904, 905 (Okla.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 959 (1983). Mr. Cone asserts the district court improperly based its denial of habeas co......
  • Hickman v. Spears
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit
    • 27 Octubre 1998
    ...Cir.1988), overruled on other grounds, Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 111 S.Ct. 2546, 115 L.Ed.2d 640 (1991); Webb v. State, 661 P.2d 904, 905 (Okla.Crim.App.1983). Based upon our review of relevant case law, we conclude that the Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma's decision denying ......
  • Gilbert v. Scott
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit
    • 9 Agosto 1991
    ...unpub. order at 1 (Okla.Cr.App. Aug. 17, 1990). See also Okla.Stat.Ann. tit. 22, § 1086 (West 1986 & 1991 Cum.Supp.); 1 Webb v. State, 661 P.2d 904, 905 (Okla.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 959, 103 S.Ct. 2434, 77 L.Ed.2d 1319 (1983); Maines v. State, 597 P.2d 774, 776 (Okla.Crim.App.19......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT