Ex Parte Dixon, No. 32267.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Missouri
Writing for the CourtAtwood
Citation52 S.W.2d 181
PartiesEX PARTE CHARLES DIXON, CARROLL KREPPS, GEORGE ECCARDT and GEORGE BROWN.
Docket NumberNo. 32267.
Decision Date08 June 1932
52 S.W.2d 181
EX PARTE CHARLES DIXON, CARROLL KREPPS, GEORGE ECCARDT and GEORGE BROWN.
No. 32267.
Supreme Court of Missouri, in Banc.
June 8, 1932.

Habeas Corpus.

PRISONER REMANDED.

Scott Miller for petitioners.

ATWOOD, C.J.


Petitioners Charles Dixon, Carroll Krepps, George Eccardt and George Brown seek release by the Habeas Corpus Act from the custody of Leslie Rudolph, Warden of the Missouri State Penitentiary.

Issuance and service of the writ and production of the bodies of petitioners were waived, and the warden filed return stating that he holds each of the petitioners under and by virtue of two commitments issued by the Circuit Court of Grundy County, Missouri, on November 30, 1929, at the November, 1929, term thereof, and by a commitment issued by the Circuit Court of Livingston County, Missouri, on April 8, 1930, certified copies of which commitments were attached to and made a part of his return.

It further appears from said return that on November 30, 1929, each of said petitioners pleaded guilty in the Circuit Court of Grundy County to an information charging grand larceny, to-wit, stealing an automobile, and to an information charging grand larceny, to-wit, stealing United States money, and pursuant thereto each was sentenced to be confined in the State penitentiary for a period of four years from November 30, 1929. It also appears from said return that on April 8, 1930, petitioners each pleaded guilty in the Circuit Court of Livingston County to a charge of robbery with firearms, based on an indictment, and on such plea each was sentenced to be confined in the penitentiary of the State of Missouri for a period of fifteen years "said punishment to commence and begin at the termination of the sentence and judgment of imprisonment in the State penitentiary imposed by the Circuit Court of Grundy County, Missouri, against said defendant at the regular November term, 1929, thereof of four years for grand larceny of money and four years for grand larceny of an automobile, said judgment and sentence being dated November 30, 1929."

[1] The verified petition herein, which in the circumstances above mentioned is to be taken as and for the writ, states that the charge of robbery with firearms, to which petitioners pleaded guilty in the Circuit Court of Livingston County on April 8, 1930, was based upon the same act which the charge of grand larceny of money rested to which petitioners pleaded guilty in the Circuit Court of Grundy County on November 30, 1929. [1] The ground upon which petitioners seek release is that...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 practice notes
  • Fletcher v. Armontrout, No. 89-0435-CV-W-JWO.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. Western District of Missouri
    • November 13, 1989
    ...Supreme Court Rule 29.15 (formerly 27.26). Wigglesworth sic v. Wyrick, 531 S.W.2d 713, 722 (Mo. banc 1976); Ex parte Dixon, 330 Mo. 652 52 S.W.2d 181, 182 (Mo. 1932). A petition for habeas corpus should be denied when the petitioner seeks relief that may be obtained on direct appeal or is e......
  • State ex rel. Lovejoy v. Skeen, No. 10629
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • November 24, 1953
    ...is void. Ex parte Evans, supra; Ex parte Mooney, supra. See Driver v. Seay, 183 Va. 273, 32 S.E.2d 87; Ex parte Dixon, 330 Mo. 652, 52 S.W.2d 181; State ex rel. Dunlap v. Utecht, 206 Minn. 41, 287 N.W. A conviction and sentence of a person in a court of competent jurisdiction, in the absenc......
  • State v. Paglino, No. 46219
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • December 8, 1958
    ...privilege or right not to be put twice in jeopardy for the same offense is personal and may be waived. Ex parte Dixon, 330 Mo. 652, 52 S.W.2d 181; State v. Reynolds, 345 Mo. 79, 131 S.W.2d 552; State v. Harper, 353 Mo. 821, 184 S.W.2d 601. We do not rule on the question of whether in this c......
  • State v. Patton, No. 46069
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • January 13, 1958
    ...common law. Art. I, Sec. 19, Const. of Missouri 1945, V.A.M.S.; State v. Toombs, 326 Mo. 981, 34 S.W.2d 61; Ex parte Dixon, 330 Mo. 652, 52 S.W.2d 181. Article I, Sec. 19, so far as here pertinent, provides: '* * * if judgment be arrested after a verdict of guilty on a defective indictment ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
8 cases
  • Fletcher v. Armontrout, No. 89-0435-CV-W-JWO.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. Western District of Missouri
    • November 13, 1989
    ...Supreme Court Rule 29.15 (formerly 27.26). Wigglesworth sic v. Wyrick, 531 S.W.2d 713, 722 (Mo. banc 1976); Ex parte Dixon, 330 Mo. 652 52 S.W.2d 181, 182 (Mo. 1932). A petition for habeas corpus should be denied when the petitioner seeks relief that may be obtained on direct appeal or is e......
  • State ex rel. Lovejoy v. Skeen, No. 10629
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • November 24, 1953
    ...is void. Ex parte Evans, supra; Ex parte Mooney, supra. See Driver v. Seay, 183 Va. 273, 32 S.E.2d 87; Ex parte Dixon, 330 Mo. 652, 52 S.W.2d 181; State ex rel. Dunlap v. Utecht, 206 Minn. 41, 287 N.W. A conviction and sentence of a person in a court of competent jurisdiction, in the absenc......
  • State v. Paglino, No. 46219
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • December 8, 1958
    ...privilege or right not to be put twice in jeopardy for the same offense is personal and may be waived. Ex parte Dixon, 330 Mo. 652, 52 S.W.2d 181; State v. Reynolds, 345 Mo. 79, 131 S.W.2d 552; State v. Harper, 353 Mo. 821, 184 S.W.2d 601. We do not rule on the question of whether in this c......
  • State v. Patton, No. 46069
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • January 13, 1958
    ...common law. Art. I, Sec. 19, Const. of Missouri 1945, V.A.M.S.; State v. Toombs, 326 Mo. 981, 34 S.W.2d 61; Ex parte Dixon, 330 Mo. 652, 52 S.W.2d 181. Article I, Sec. 19, so far as here pertinent, provides: '* * * if judgment be arrested after a verdict of guilty on a defective indictment ......
  • 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