Ex parte Peaker
| Decision Date | 16 June 1948 |
| Docket Number | A-10974. |
| Parties | Ex parte PEAKER. |
| Court | United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma |
Proceeding in the matter of the habeas corpus of W. S. Peaker, wherein the District Court denied petition. On application of petitioner for leave to appeal.
Order in accordance with opinion.
Syllabus by the Court
1. Under the Constitution and statutes of Oklahoma, the District Court and the Criminal Court of Appeals have concurrent original jurisdiction in habeas corpus actions.
2. Action of the District Court in denying a writ of habeas corpus is conclusive as to that proceeding and no appeal will lie to the Criminal Court of Appeals. This does not preclude the petitioner from filing an original action in the Criminal Court of Appeals presenting the same issue for determination as was presented before the District Court.
3. Technical rulings of pleading and procedure are not required in Criminal Court of Appeals, and where there is filed a petition styled 'Appeal from action of District Court denying Habeas Corpus', but said petition alleges facts authorizing Criminal Court of Appeals to treat the action as an original proceeding in said court, a rule to show cause will be issued to determine the cause of the restraint of the petitioner.
4. Where Criminal Court of Appeals has denied application for writ of habeas corpus, it will not entertain a subsequent application for such writ on the same grounds or facts presented in the first application.
5. Petitioner failed to sustain burden to show that trial court was without jurisdiction to render judgment and writ of habeas corpus is denied.
W. S Peaker, pro se.
Mac Q Williamson, Atty. Gen., and Sam H. Lattimore, Asst. Atty Gen., for defendant in error.
The petitioner, W. S. Peaker, has filed a verified petition in this Court setting up certain facts allegedly surrounding his conviction of the crime of rape for which he is serving a sentence in the State Penitentiary and further stating that he had filed a petition before the Honorable W. A. Lackey, Judge of the District Court of Pittsburg County, which was denied, and praying that this Court grant an appeal from the order of Judge Lackey denying the writ of habeas corpus, and on appeal to issue the writ of habeas corpus.
We have heretofore assumed original jurisdiction and heard a similar petition in habeas corpus filed on behalf of this petitioner. Ex parte Peaker, Okl.Cr., 170 P.2d 264. In that case the facts pertaining to the conviction of the accused are fully related and we shall not encumber this opinion by again reciting the same.
Under the Constitution and statutes of Oklahoma, the District Court, the Criminal Court of Appeals, and other courts of record, have concurrent original jurisdiction in habeas corpus actions. Art. 7, §§ 2, 10, 12, Oklahoma Constitution; 20 O.S.1941 § 41.
See also, State ex rel. Wester v. Caldwell, Okl.Cr., 181 P.2d 843.
When a petition in habeas corpus is filed before any of said courts of record, the court before whom the petition is filed passes upon the matter before it and no appeal will lie from the judgment of the court. The action of the court, however, does not prevent the petitioner...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ex parte Workman
...was convicted was without authority to render the judgment complained of, and under such conditions the writ must be denied. Ex parte Peaker, Okl.Cr., 194 P.2d 893, not reported in State reports. Moreover the writ of habeas corpus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. Ex parte Motley,......