Qualls v. State
| Decision Date | 24 April 1963 |
| Docket Number | No. A-13336,A-13336 |
| Citation | 381 P.2d 904 |
| Parties | Ealic QUALLS, Petitioner, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, and the District Court of Carter County, Okla., Respondents. |
| Court | United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. Title 22 O.S.A. § 1054, provides that in felony cases an appeal must be taken within six months (amended in 1961 to three months) after judgment is rendered. This provision of the statute is mandatory, and must be strictly followed, and this Court cannot entertain an appeal not perfected within such time
2. There is no statute in this state which permits this Court to issue an order requiring the district court to furnish a transcript of casemade after the time has expired for taking an appeal in a criminal case.
3. Where the only stated reason for requesting casemade at expense of trial court, after time for filing appeal has expired, is to file petition for writ of habeas corpus, it would be vain act to issue a mandate to the trial court to cause such casemade to be prepared, since Court of Criminal Appeals could consider only jurisdictional matters in habeas corpus proceeding.
Original proceeding in Mandamus in which Ealic Qualls seeks a casemade at the expense of the District Court of Carter County, Oklahoma. Writ denied.
Ealic Qualls, petitioner, pro se.
Charles Nesbitt, Atty. Gen., Hugh H. Collum, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondents.
This is an original petition in Mandamus by Ealic Qualls, being one and the same person as Ealia Qualls, Inmate #62379, for a casemade from the District Court of Carter County, Oklahoma.
Petitioner was sentenced to life imprisonment for the crime of Murder on June 5, 1959, and seeks a casemade for the purpose of testing the legality of his conviction and sentence.
Title 22 O.S.A. § 1054 provides that in felony cases, an appeal must be taken within six months (amended to three months in 1961) after judgment is rendered. This provision of the statute is mandatory, and must be strictly followed, and this Court cannot entertain an appeal not perfected within such time. In the case of In re Application of Miller, 87 Okl.Cr. 423, 198 P.2d 755, this Court said:
'There is no statute in this state which permits this court to issue an order requiring the district court to furnish a transcript of casemade after the time has expired for taking an appeal in a criminal case.'
See, also, Graham v. State, Okl.Cr., 372 P.2d 887, and cases cited therein.
Since petitioners time for appeal has long since expired, his only...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Duvall v. State
...530, 532 (Okl.Cr.1965) (appeal dismissed when given additional time to perfect appeal and petitioner failed to do so); Qualls v. State, 381 P.2d 904, 905 (Okl.Cr.App.1963) (in habeas/post-conviction appeal, judgment and sentence all that is necessary under existing rules; but judgment and s......