Knight v. James

Decision Date14 January 1895
Docket NumberNo. 841,841
Citation15 S.Ct. 248,39 L.Ed. 310,155 U.S. 685
PartiesMcKNIGHT v. JAMES
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

This proceeding was begun by a petition in habeas corpus to the circuit court of Franklin county, Ohio, setting forth that the petitioner, McKnight, was unlawfully deprived of his liberty in the Ohio penitentiary, under a certificate of sentence of the court of common pleas of Wood county, for the crime of forgery. Petitioner charged that there was no judgment or sentence authorizing such certificate; that the same was therefore void, and said imprisonment without legal authority, and without due process of law.

Under this petition a writ of habeas corpus was granted by the Honorable Gilbert H. Stewart, judge of the circuit court of the Second circuit, and McKnight ordered to be produced before him in Columbus on August 31, 1894.

Respondent, James, made return to the writ, setting forth the certificate of sentence, and averring that the court of common pleas of Wood county did render the judgment and pronounce the sentence by authority of which he held McKnight in custody; that said judgment was afterwards affirmed by the circuit court of Wood county, in a proceeding in error prosecuted by McKnight; that the case was subsequently brought before the supreme court of Ohio, on a motion made and filed by this petitioner; and that that court, after reviewing the entire record and proceedings in the lower courts, denied the application, thus affirming the original judgment of the court of common pleas. 28 N. E. 1034.

Petitioner replied and averred that, after entering a plea of 'Not guilty,' he was brought before the court without counsel, and indigent and unable to procure counsel; but the court proceeded to try him without counsel to defend him, and he was thereby deprived of his constitutional right to have the assistance of counsel in his defense; and that the certificate of sentence also was void, in the fact that the requirement that he be kept at hard labor, which appears in such certificate, was not imposed by the court as a part of its sentence, and was wholly unauthorized.

The case was heard September 1, 1894, upon pleadings and testimony, by the Honorable Gilbert H. Stewart, sitting in chambers, and an order made that McKnight be remanded to the custody of the defendant, James, as warden of the Ohio penitentiary; whereupon the petitioner sued out this writ of error, directed to the judge by name.

Hiram P. McKnight, in pro. per.

J. K. Richards and Atty. Gen. Johns, for defendant in error.

Mr. Justice BROWN, after stating the facts in the foregoing language, delivered the opinion of the court.

As under Rev. St. § 709, a writ of error will go from this court only to the final judgment of the highest court of the state in which a decision in the suit can be had, it is evident that our jurisdiction in this case cannot be sustained unless an order of a judge at chambers...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • City of Greenwood v. Humphrey & Co., Inc
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • May 23, 1938
    ... ... Slauson, 130 U.S. 435, 32 L.Ed. 989, 9 ... S.Ct. 573; Carper v. Fitzgerald, 121 U.S. 87, 30 ... L.Ed. 882, 7 S.Ct. 825; McKnight v. James, 155 U.S ... 685, 39 L.Ed. 310, 15 S.Ct. 248; Lambert v Barrett, ... 157 U.S. 697, 39 L.Ed. 865, 15 S.Ct. 722; Craig v ... Hecht, 263 U.S ... ...
  • Betts v. Brady
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • June 1, 1942
    ...within the scope of § 237. Doubt that his judgment in the present instance is such arises out of our decision in McKnight v. James, 155 U.S. 685, 15 S.Ct. 248, 39 L.Ed. 310, where we refused to review the denial of a discharge by a judge of an inferior court of Ohio who issued the writ and ......
  • Craig v. Hecht, 82
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • November 19, 1923
    ...121 U. S. 87, 7 Sup. Ct. 825, 30 L. Ed. 882, Ex parte Lennon, 150 U. S. 393, 14 Sup. Ct. 123, 37 L. Ed. 1120, McKnight v. James, 155 U. S. 685, 15 Sup. Ct. 248, 39 L. Ed. 310, Lambert v. Barrett, 157 U. S. 697, 15 Sup. Ct. 722, 39 L. Ed. 865, and Harkrader v. Wadley, 172 U. S. 148, 19 Sup. ......
  • Chow Loy v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • November 23, 1901
    ... ... v. Coe, 155 U.S. 76, 15 Sup.Ct. 16, 39 ... L.Ed. 76; Lambert v. Barrett, 157 U.S. 697, 15 ... Sup.Ct. 722, 39 L.Ed. 865; McKnight v. James, 155 ... U.S. 685, 15 Sup.Ct. 248, 39 L.Ed. 310; In re ... Lennon, 150 U.S. 393, 14 Sup.Ct. 123, 37 L.Ed. 1120 ... In ... U.S. v ... ...
  • 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