Dreadfulwater v. State
| Decision Date | 08 June 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. A--13919,A--13919 |
| Citation | 415 P.2d 493 |
| Parties | Jerry DREADFULWATER, Petitionr, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, Respondent. |
| Court | United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma |
Syllabus by the Court
1. Where accused is incarcerated in Federal Correctional Institution, at LaTuna, Texas, such incarceration is good cause for delay in bringing him to trial, even where state authorities fail to request his delivery to state court for trial. 22 O.S.A. § 812; Okl.Const. art. 2, § 20.
2. The State of Oklahoma is not required to assume cost incident to affording a speedy trial, i.e., in returning accused to state, who on his own volition placed himself beyond jurisdiction of state and in custody of Federal authorities. 22 O.S.A. § 812; Okl.Const.art. 2, § 20 3. Preliminary hearing is not trial but is analogous to grand jury proceeding, and constitutional provision in regard to speedy trial will not be applicable to preliminary hearing in absence of necessary jurisdictional requisites. Okl.Const. art. 2, § 20.
4. Where jurisdiction of person of prisoner who is serving federal sentence has not attached in justice court in which he has been charged with larceny of an automobile, prisoner is not entitled to writ of mandamus commanding state to return him to county for preliminary hearing. Okl.Const. art. 2, § 20.
Original proceeding by petitioner wherein he seeks writ of mandamus commanding State of Oklahoma to return him to Pittsburg County, Oklahoma, from the Federal Correctional Institution at LaTuna, Texas, for trial on certain charges pending against him there. Writ denied.
Jerry Dreadfulwater, pro se.
Charles Nesbitt, Atty. Gen., Charles Owens, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.
Jerry Dreadfulwater, petitioner, is presently confined in the Federal Correctional Institution, at LaTuna, Texas. He has filed petition for a writ of mandamus, and therein alleges that a hold order or detainer warrant for the arrest of the petitioner has been filed by Pittsburg County, Oklahoma. Petitioner seeks by writ of mandamus to be brought to immediate trial in Pittsburg County, or, in the alternative to have the case against him there dismissed.
The Attorney General has filed a response to said petition. Therein it is admitted that on August 20, 1964 a complaint was filed in the justice of the peace court, by the county attorney of Pittsburg County, charging the petitioner with larceny of an automobile, and that a warrant was issued thereon, but before the petitioner could be arrested on said warrant, he departed from the State of Oklahoma, and was subsequently incarcerated in the State of Texas.
The principle of law involved in this case has received the consideration of this Court a number of times. See Hurst v. Pitman, 90 Okl.Cr. 329, 213 P.2d 877; Bonsor v. District Court of Cimarron County, Okl.Cr., 303 P.2d 417; White v. Brown, Okl.Cr., 349 P.2d 509; Auten v. State, Okl.Cr., 377 P.2d 61.
In the case of Hurst v. Pitman, supra, this Court said:
'A prisoner in federal penitentiary located in another...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Richerson v. State
...123 N.W.2d 116 (1963); Snider v. State, 418 P.2d 102 (Okl.Cr., 1966); Hobbs v. State, 417 P.2d 934 (Okl.Cr., 1966); Dreadfulwater v. State, 415 P.2d 493 (Okl.Cr., 1966). But see: State v. Heisler, 95 Ariz. 353, 390 P.2d 846 (1964), and State v. Kostura, 98 Ariz. 186, 403 P.2d 283 (1965), ho......
-
Naugle v. State of Oklahoma
...State, supra, 369 P.2d 479; and see Application of Melton, Okl.Cr., 342 P.2d 571; Auten v. State, Okl.Cr., 377 P.2d 61; Dreadfulwater v. State, Okl. Cr., 415 P.2d 493. We have affirmed that a state is not constitutionally obliged to bring a defendant to trial on a state charge during the pe......
-
Naugle v. Freeman
...of Justice, Bureau of Prisons.2 In re Melton, Okl.Cr.App., 342 P.2d 571; Auten v. State, Okl.Cr.App., 377 P.2d 61; Dreadfulwater v. State, Okl.Cr.App., 415 P.2d 493; Hobbs v. State, Okl.Cr.App., 417 P.2d 934; Fryar v. State, Okl.Cr.App., 440 P.2d ...
-
Fryar v. State
...Cimmarron County, Okl.Cr., 303 P.2d 471; White v. Brown, Okl.Cr., 349 P.2d 509; Auten v. State, Okl.Cr., 377 P.2d 61; and Dreadfulwater v. State, Okl.Cr., 415 P.2d 493; Application of Melton, Okl.Cr., 342 P.2d 571; Head v. State, Okl.Cr., 388 P.2d 327; and in another recent decision of Ange......