In re Arthur Owen

• Decision Date: 12 November 1921
• Docket Number: 23,012
• Parties: In re ARTHUR OWEN, Petitioner
• Court: Kansas Supreme Court

200 P. 1070

109 Kan. 695

In re ARTHUR OWEN, Petitioner

No. 23,012

Supreme Court of Kansas

November 12, 1921

Decided July, 1921.

Original proceeding in habeas corpus.

Writ denied.

SYLLABUS

SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.

HABEAS CORPUS--Petitioner's Case Still Pending and Undetermined--Writ Denied. Rule followed that the supreme court will not interfere with the orderly jurisdiction of an inferior court by summary discharge of a petitioner on habeas corpus, when the petitioner's cause is still pending and undetermined in such lower court, and where all the objections to the validity of the proceedings being taken against the petitioner can still be urged before the court whose process has deprived him of his liberty, and where all adverse rulings of the trial court can be reviewed and, if erroneous, corrected by appeal.

W. W Harvey, of Ashland, for the petitioner.

Richard J. Hopkins, attorney-general, and J. B. Hayes, county attorney, for the respondent.

OPINION

DAWSON, J.:

The petitioner, Arthur Owen, makes this application for a writ of habeas corpus and prays that he be set at liberty from the custody of the sheriff of Clark county.

From the application for the writ, and from the sheriff's return thereto, and from an agreed statement of facts signed by counsel for the petitioner and the county attorney, it appears that through false and fraudulent representations Owen obtained a bank credit from Lot Ravenscraft, a banker of Sitka, Clark county, Kansas, in the sum of $ 23,000. Owen falsely represented to Ravenscraft that he owned 400 head of cattle which were on Owen's ranch in Oklahoma, and he solicited a loan of $ 23,000 thereon. Ravenscraft made the loan and took a mortgage on Owen's cattle. Owen gave the numbers, classes and description of the cattle which he pretended to own and keep on his Oklahoma ranch. He executed a note to Ravenscraft for $ 23,000 payable in 180 days, and likewise signed and executed the mortgage to him. It was part of the negotiations between Ravenscraft and Owen, that the sum loaned should be deposited in Ravenscraft's bank in Sitka, and that $ 18,000 of this deposit should only be drawn out by Owen through the State Bank of Laverne, Oklahoma, for the purpose of paying off loans on Owen's cattle, and the balance, $ 5,000, should remain in Ravenscraft's bank subject to Owen's check.

These negotiations were arranged and consummated in Clark county, Kansas.

Part of the agreed statement of facts recites:

"5. For several years Owen had carried a general checking account at the Laverne State Bank. On June 10th, a Customer's Draft was drawn under his direction by the assistant cashier of said bank, on the Sitka State Bank, at Sitka, Kansas, for $ 18,000.00. This draft was cashed by Owen at the Laverne State Bank on said date and he was given credit for the full amount thereof on his general account at the Laverne State Bank and given a deposit slip therefor. . . . On June 13th, another Customer's Draft was drawn by Owen on the Sitka State Bank, for $ 5,000.00. This draft was cashed by Owen at the Laverne State Bank on said date and he was given credit for the full amount thereof on his general account at the Laverne State Bank and given a deposit slip therefor. . . .

"6. About September 1st, 1918, Ravenscraft inspected the Owen cattle on his ranch near Laverne and found only about 140 head, and also found other facts which convinced him that Owen had only about 140 head of cattle at the time Owen made the mortgage to Ravenscraft at Sitka, Kansas, June 8th, instead of the number shown by the mortgage."

Soon after the discovery of Owen's wrongdoing, Ravenscraft caused him to be arrested in Oklahoma, on a charge of having obtained $ 23,000, in Harper county, Oklahoma, by false representations and pretenses concerning the number of cattle owned by him at the time he executed the mortgage to Ravenscraft in Clark county, Kansas. Owen was arrested and the local court bound him over to answer to the district court of Harper county, Oklahoma, on this charge--a felony in that state. Later Owen was tried and convicted, and sentenced to 90 days in jail and to pay a fine of $ 1,000. During his trial in Oklahoma, defendant raised the question of jurisdiction, but the trial court ruled that it had jurisdiction because "of the showing that the money was obtained in Oklahoma." Thereupon, Owen appealed to the court of criminal appeals of Oklahoma where the cause, presumably, is now pending.

After the conviction and sentence of Owen in Harper county,...