Ex parte Davenport

CourtSupreme Court of Oregon
Writing for the CourtBELT, J. (after stating the facts as above).
Citation114 Or. 650,236 P. 758
Decision Date16 June 1925
PartiesEX PARTE DAVENPORT. APPEAL OF OLSON, SHERIFF.

236 P. 758

114 Or. 650

EX PARTE DAVENPORT. APPEAL OF OLSON, SHERIFF.

Supreme Court of Oregon

June 16, 1925


In bank.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Crook County; Geo. W. Stapleton, Judge.

Petition of Pearl M. Davenport for writ of habeas corpus to be directed to Olie H. Olson, Sheriff of Crook County. From judgment discharging petitioner, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

This is a habeas corpus proceeding, submitted on the brief of appellant, to determine whether petitioner's liberty is unlawfully restrained. It appears from the record that she was arrested for the crimes of selling and having in her possession intoxicating liquor. She appeared before J. O. Powell, justice of the peace for Johnson Creek precinct, Crook county, and entered a plea of guilty to both charges, whereupon sentence was imposed upon her to pay a fine of $1,000. On failure to pay the fine, appellant, by order of the court, was committed to jail. In the petition for the writ it is averred that there is an unlawful imprisonment, in that the justice of the peace, at the time of imposing sentence, undertook to hold court in the city of Prineville, Or., and not within the boundaries of the precinct for which he was elected. Petitioner asserts that the justice of the peace had no jurisdiction so to act, and that the order committing her to jail was null and void. In appellant's brief it is stated that Johnson Creek precinct is contiguous to, but not within, the corporate limits of the city of Prineville, and that Powell, "for convenience and to save taking prisoners to his home in the country, sometimes received pleas of guilty in the courthouse at Prineville." It so happened in the instant case. Olie H. Olson, sheriff of Crook county, upon whom the writ of habeas corpus was served, made the following return thereto:

"I, Olie H. Olson, the duly elected, acting, qualified, and sworn sheriff of the County of Crook, State of Oregon, and upon whom a writ of habeas corpus was served in the foregoing entitled matter, do hereby certify that I do now have, and have had since the 6th day of October, A. D. 1924, in my custody as such sheriff, under restraint and confined in the county jail of said Crook County, Or., at Prineville, the above-named Pearl M. Davenport; that, as authority for such restraint and confinement, I have the commitment of the Justice's Court of the State of Oregon for Crook County, Johnson Creek Precinct, showing the conviction of the said Pearl M. Davenport for a crime committed against the laws and the statutes of the State of Oregon in such cases made and provided, as follows, to wit:

" 'In the Justice's Court for the Johnson Creek Precinct of Crook County, State of Oregon. State of Oregon, Plaintiff, v. Pearl Davenport, Defendant. Commitment.

" 'To the Sheriff or Any Constable of Said County--Greeting:

" 'In the Name of the State of Oregon: An order having this day been made by me that Pearl M. Davenport be held to answer upon the charge of possession and selling liquor contrary to statute, you are therefore commanded to receive her into your custody and detain him (her) until legally discharged. Pay a fine of $1,000 and costs or lay in jail at $2 a day until said fine and costs be satisfied. Dated at...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 practice notes
  • Huffman v. Alexander
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oregon
    • February 11, 1953
    ...to the return on the writ we omit the petition Page 90 for the writ which 'ceases to function when the writ is issued.' In re Davenport, 114 Or. 650, 236 P. 758, 760; 25 Am.Jur., Habeas Corpus, § 143, p. 243. As required by statute, the petition sets forth a copy of the judgment and sentenc......
  • Macomber v. Alexander
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oregon
    • April 8, 1953
    ...to the circuit court with directions that judgment be entered in accordance with the mandate and the writ dismissed. In re Davenport, 114 Or. 650, 236 P. 758 was a case in which the plaintiff brought habeas corpus and obtained a judgment discharging her from custody. The state appealed and ......
  • Ex parte Quinn
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oregon
    • June 27, 1951
    ...nevertheless, the better practice is to follow the same procedure followed in the special proceeding under the statute. In re Davenport, 114 Or. 650, 655, 236 P. 758; 39 C.J.S., Habeas Corpus, § 80, § 88, pages 625, It is provided by statute in this state that 'No cause shall be dismissed f......
  • Gage v. Maass, C-12030
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oregon
    • July 26, 1988
    ...in the instant case was amply sufficient to demand the issuance of the writ. Quinn v. Hanks, 192 Or 254, 268, 233 P2d 767; In re Davenport, 114 Or 650, 655, 236 P 758; 39 CJS 625, Habeas corpus; § 80, p 651; § 88." [306 Or. 203] By the time the motion was filed, the only pleadings were the ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
7 cases
  • Huffman v. Alexander
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oregon
    • February 11, 1953
    ...to the return on the writ we omit the petition Page 90 for the writ which 'ceases to function when the writ is issued.' In re Davenport, 114 Or. 650, 236 P. 758, 760; 25 Am.Jur., Habeas Corpus, § 143, p. 243. As required by statute, the petition sets forth a copy of the judgment and sentenc......
  • Macomber v. Alexander
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oregon
    • April 8, 1953
    ...to the circuit court with directions that judgment be entered in accordance with the mandate and the writ dismissed. In re Davenport, 114 Or. 650, 236 P. 758 was a case in which the plaintiff brought habeas corpus and obtained a judgment discharging her from custody. The state appealed and ......
  • Ex parte Quinn
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oregon
    • June 27, 1951
    ...nevertheless, the better practice is to follow the same procedure followed in the special proceeding under the statute. In re Davenport, 114 Or. 650, 655, 236 P. 758; 39 C.J.S., Habeas Corpus, § 80, § 88, pages 625, It is provided by statute in this state that 'No cause shall be dismissed f......
  • Gage v. Maass, C-12030
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oregon
    • July 26, 1988
    ...in the instant case was amply sufficient to demand the issuance of the writ. Quinn v. Hanks, 192 Or 254, 268, 233 P2d 767; In re Davenport, 114 Or 650, 655, 236 P 758; 39 CJS 625, Habeas corpus; § 80, p 651; § 88." [306 Or. 203] By the time the motion was filed, the only pleadings were the ......
  • 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