Hable v. State, 3 Div. 80

Decision Date30 June 1961
Docket Number3 Div. 80
Citation132 So.2d 271,41 Ala.App. 398
PartiesWilliam HABLE v. STATE.
CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

William Hable, pro se.

MacDonald Gallion, Atty. Gen., and Geo. D. Mentz, Asst. Atty. Gen., for State.

HARWOOD, Presiding Judge.

This is an appeal from an order and judgment of the Hon. Eugene Carter, one of the judges of the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, denying the appellant's release in a habeas corpus proceeding, and returning him to the custody of the respondents, who are prison officials of the State of Alabama.

As we interpret the petition filed in the court below, the appellant seeks to assert that 'in the totality of the facts' the appellant was not represented by counsel at the trial in which he was convicted of murder in the first degree, though in the course of his petition filed in the habeas corpus proceedings the appellant states: 'Petitioner at the onset wishes to make it abundantly clear that he in no way criticizes the conduct of the two fine lawyers who represented him upon the trial.'

In the proceedings below, the State filed its return, and certain documents attached as exhibits to the return. These exhibits show that this appellant was indicted in August 1957, by a Grand Jury of Geneva County for murder in the first degree; that on 18 October 1957, the appellant accompanied by counsel was arraigned and entered a plea of not guilty and a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity; on 25 November 1957, the date set for his trial, the appellant filed in the Circuit Court of Geneva County a document withdrawing his pleas of not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity, made upon his arraignment. This document is signed both by the appellant and by his two attorneys who represented him in the murder prosecution.

The judgment of the Circuit Court of Geneva County introduced in evidence, recites that with leave of the court this appellant withdrew his plea of not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity and entered a plea of guilty to the offense of murder in the first degree as charged in the indictment. Thereafter the jury returned a verdict of guilty of murder in the first degree, fixed the appellant's punishment at life imprisonment in the penitentiary, and the judgment of guilty was entered by the court pursuant to such verdict, and punishment was fixed by the court at life imprisonment in the penitentiary as fixed by the jury

In his petition in...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • Ex Parte Mitchell, CR-05-0374.
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • February 3, 2006
    ...612 (Ala.Crim.App. 1982). "The writ [of habeas corpus] is against void but not irregular or voidable judgments." Hable v. State, 41 Ala.App. 398, 399, 132 So.2d 271, 272 (1961). See also Greer v. State, 49 Ala.App. 36, 268 So.2d 502 (1972); Parham v. State, 285 Ala. 334, 231 So.2d 899 (1970......
  • State v. McCurley
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • March 17, 1981
    ...a judgment which is void on its face for want of jurisdiction. State v. Baker, 268 Ala. 410, 108 So.2d 361 (1959); Hable v. State, 41 Ala.App. 398, 132 So.2d 271 (1961); Argo v. State, 41 Ala.App. 347, 133 So.2d 201 (1961). Habeas corpus will lie where the invalidity of the prior court judg......
  • Ex Parte Egbuonu
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • January 21, 2005
    ...40 Ala.App. at 321, 114 So.2d at 162. "The writ is against void but not irregular or voidable judgments." Hable v. State, 41 Ala.App. 398, 399, 132 So.2d 271, 272 (1961). See also Greer v. State, 49 Ala.App. 36, 268 So.2d 502 (1972); Parham v. State, 285 Ala. 334, 231 So.2d 899 (1970); Nati......
  • Parham v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • February 19, 1970
    ...240 Ala. 577, 200 So. 560; Johnson v. Williams, 244 Ala. 391, 13 So.2d 683; Davis v. State, 153 Ala. 73, 45 So. 154.' In Hable v. State, 41 Ala.App. 398, 132 So.2d 271, cert. den. 368 U.S. 883, 82 S.Ct. 136, 7 L.Ed.2d 83, the court, per Harwood, P.J., 'The writ of habeas corpus cannot be us......
  • 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