Cutter v. Buchanan
| Decision Date | 03 February 1956 |
| Parties | Roy CUTTER, Appellant, v. W. Jess BUCHANAN, Warden, State Prison, Eddyville, Ky., Appellee. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky |
Roy Cutter, pro se.
J. D. Buckman, Jr., Atty. Gen., W. Owen Keller, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
STANLEY, Commissioner.
The appeal is by Roy Cutter from a judgment dismissing his petition for habeas corpus. The appellant is imprisoned in the Eddyville penitentiary under a judgment of the Oldham Circuit Court convicting him of escaping as a prisoner confined in the reformatory located in that county.
Waiving technical deficiencies in the petition, including a failure to file a copy of the judgment of conviction, we decide the case, as did the circuit judge, on the mere statements of the petition. In substance, the allegations are that the petitioner was a trusty committed to the reformatory but was being kept in a prison compound near Danville in Boyle County. When he left there he was looking after dairy cattle in a pasture, was not under guard and was 'working as a free man and trusty and he could walk away when he pleased.' We assume that his work was at the Kentucky Hospital, a state mental institution located in Boyle County.
The petitioner pleads (1) that under such conditions he could not be guilty of escape from prison, and (2) in any event the Oldham Circuit Court had no jurisdiction to try him.
KRS 432.390 reads: '(1) Any person convicted of a crime who, while serving a sentence of imprisonment in the penitentiary, escapes from the penitentiary or wherever he may be confined, or flees from whatever bounds he may be assigned, whether under guard or as a trusty, shall be further confined to the penitentiary for not less than three nor more than six years, to commence after he has served out the sentence for which he was originally confined.' This expressly includes a prison trusty under the circumstances described by the petitioner.
KRS 432.390(3) provides that 'the circuit court of the county in which the convict was confined, or of the county from which he was sent out under assignment to work, shall have jurisdiction.'
Sec. 18 of the Criminal Code of Practice reads: 'The local jurisdiction of circuit courts and justices' courts shall be of offenses committed within the respective counties in which they are held.' Of course, a circuit court has no jurisdiction to punish an offense committed in another county in the absence of a change of venue thereto. Commonwealth v....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Stewart v. State
...to the statute applied in People v. Vanderburg, 67 Cal.App. 217, 227 P. 621 (1924), and the Kentucky statute applied in Cutter v. Buchanan, 286 S.W.2d 902, 903 (Ky.1956), and Clark v. Commonwealth, 293 S.W.2d 465, 467 (Ky.1956), cert. denied, 353 U.S. 923, 77 S.Ct. 682, 1 L.Ed.2d 720 (1957)......
-
State in Interest of M. S.
...1 Storey 107, 51 Del. 107, 138 A.2d 500 (Super.Ct.1958); State v. Rardon, 221 Ind. 154, 46 N.E.2d 605 (Sup.Ct.1943); Cutter v. Buchanan, 286 S.W.2d 902 (Ky.Ct.App.1956); Shifflett v. State, 4 Md.App. 227, 242 A.2d 182 (Ct.App.1968); State ex Johnson v. Warden, 196 Md. 672, 75 A.2d 843 (Ct.A......
-
State v. Paris
...602, 604–605 (Cal.Ct.App.1972) ; People v. Haskins, 177 Cal.App.2d 84, 2 Cal.Rptr. 34, 46 (Cal.Dist.Ct.App.1960) ; Cutter v. Buchannan, 286 S.W.2d 902, 903–904 (Ky.1956) ; State v. Holbrook, 318 A.2d 62, 67–68 (Me.1974) ; Shifflett v. State, 4 Md.App. 227, 242 A.2d 182, 184 (Md.Ct.Spec.App.......
-
United States v. Person
...of. In one of the cases the statute involved expressly declared that the defendant's acts constituted an escape from custody. Cutter v. Buchanan, 286 S.W.2d 902 (Ky. Ct. of App.1956). In the second case the defendant was free to come and go, much like the defendant in this case. But the cou......