Goodman v. Daly

• Decision Date: 05 April 1929
• Docket Number: No. 25640.,25640.
• Citation: 165 N.E. 906,201 Ind. 332
• Parties: GOODMAN v. DALY, Warden.
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court

201 Ind. 332

165 N.E. 906

GOODMAN

v.DALY, Warden.

No. 25640.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

April 5, 1929.

Appeal from Superior Court, La Porte County.

Habeas corpus proceeding by John P. Goodman against Walter H. Daly, Warden of the Indiana State Prison. Judgment for defendant, and petitioner appeals. Affirmed.

Ira C. Tilton, of Valparaiso, for appellant.

Arthur L. Gilliom, Atty. Gen., and Virgil E. Whitaker, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellee.

WILLOUGHBY, J.

On the 11th day of June, 1928, the appellant filed his verified petition, for a writ of habeas corpus, in the La Porte superior court, La Porte county, Ind. In his petition he alleges that he is unlawfully restrained of his liberty by one Walter H. Daly, warden of the state prison at Michigan City, Ind., at and in said county and state. The appellant also alleges that the cause and pretense of said restraint is set out in his complaint by a certified copy of the proceedings in the St. Joseph superior court, at South Bend, Ind., wherein this petitioner was tried on an indictment and found guilty of the crime of burglary; that the indictment against him also charged grand larceny; and that the defendant was an habitual criminal as described in sections 2339 and 2340, Burns' 1926; that the petitioner in said cause was tried in the St. Joseph superior court No. 2; and that the defendant is now holding him pursuant to a commitment issued by the said St. Joseph superior court No. 2.

A writ of habeas corpus was ordered issued against the defendant, Walter H. Daly, returnable June 28, 1928, at 10 o'clock a. m. The respondent for his return says that he is warden of the state prison at Michigan City, Ind., and as such has custody over the petitioner, John P. Goodman, by authority of a commitment which was issued on a judgment duly rendered in the St. Joseph superior court No. 2, ordering said petitioner to be imprisoned in the state prison during his natural lifetime for the offense of burglary and being an habitual criminal; that the term of said commitment has not been changed nor has it expired; and that a copy of said commitment is filed and marked Exhibit 1 and made a part of his return. Said return is duly verified.

Exhibit No. 1 sets out a copy of the judgment and the order of commitment which is signed by the judge of said superior court of St. Joseph county, and charges the sheriff of St. Joseph county with the due execution of the judgment. To this paper is attached the certificate of the clerk of said superior court No. 2 of St. Joseph county, bearing date of November 10, 1923. The petitioner filed exceptions to the return, and the exceptions were overruled and judgment rendered in favor of appellee.

[1] It appears from the record that this commitment was issued and served November 10, 1923. It was issued out of superior court No. 2 of St. Joseph county. This present suit was brought on the 11th day of June, 1928. The judgment upon which the commitment in this case was issued was never appealed from, and is in full force and effect. We know from the record that the judgment and commitment was issued out of superior court No. 2 of St. Joseph county, Ind. We know that the La Porte superior court is a court of co-ordinate jurisdiction with the said St. Joseph superior court No. 2. We know from the record that the St. Joseph superior court No. 2 was a court having jurisdiction to try the offense charged against the appellant, and had both jurisdiction of the offense and of the person. This is apparent from the return and the record presented in this appeal. The La Porte superior court has no jurisdiction to review the proceedings of the St. Joseph superior court No. 2. Stephenson v. Daly, 200 Ind. -, 158 N. E. 289;Shideler v. Vrljich, 195 Ind. 563, 145 N. E. 881.

[2] If an error was made by the said St. Joseph superior court, the remedy was by appeal, but as we have seen, no appeal has been taken or attempted, although the appellant has been in prison for five years. If the decision of superior court No. 2 of St. Joseph county was wrong, the appellant had his remedy by appeal and not by habeas corpus. See Stephenson v. Daly, supra.

[3] In Shideler v. Vrljich, supra, it is held that one circuit court has no jurisdiction to issue a writ of habeas corpus and set aside an order of commitment issued by another court having jurisdiction of the subject-matter and of the person. No circuit court has supervisory power over the orders of another, and it cannot be used by one court to correct the errors of another of equal jurisdiction. To the same effect, see Baker v. Krietenstein, 185...