State ex rel. Nixon v. Jaynes
| Citation | 73 S.W.3d 623 |
| Decision Date | 23 April 2002 |
| Docket Number | No. SC 83941.,SC 83941. |
| Parties | STATE ex rel. Jeremiah W. (Jay) NIXON, Attorney General, Relator, v. The Honorable Ralph JAYNES, Circuit Judge, Randolph County, and Norma Prange, Circuit Clerk, Randolph County, Respondents. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Missouri |
Eric B. Wise pleaded guilty to three drug offenses. Initially, he was placed on probation. Subsequently, the probation was revoked by the circuit court of Nodaway County, and Wise began serving his sentence. He then filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the circuit court of Randolph County—the county where he was confined.
The petition alleged that the trial court denied Wise the benefit of counsel at the probation revocation hearing. The petition also asserted that the probation violation was a "technical" violation for which an alternative to incarceration was applicable and available. The petition was granted by the circuit court on the issue of the benefit of counsel. As a remedy, the court purported to vacate the judgment revoking probation and to remand Wise to the Nodaway County circuit court, in which the revocation had occurred, for further proceedings.
The attorney general sought review of the circuit court's decision by means of a petition for writ of certiorari. Mo. Const. article V, section 4. This Court issued the writ as of course and of right. State ex rel. Nixon v. Kelly, 58 S.W.3d 513, 516 (Mo. banc 2001).1 This Court finds that the respondent judge acted in excess of his rightful jurisdiction. The record of the circuit court granting habeas corpus relief is quashed.
Generally, habeas corpus proceedings are limited to determining the facial validity of confinement. State ex rel. Simmons v. White, 866 S.W.2d 443, 445 (Mo. banc 1993). Such proceedings are properly invoked to challenge an improper probation revocation. State ex rel. Simmons v. White, 866 S.W.2d 443, 447, n. 3 (Mo. banc 1993); Abel v. Wyrick, 574 S.W.2d 411, 413 (Mo. banc 1978). The habeas corpus petitioner has the burden of proof to show that he is entitled to habeas corpus relief. McIntosh v. Haynes, 545 S.W.2d 647, 654 (Mo. banc 1977).
The record certified to this Court contains the first amended judgment of the Nodaway County circuit court. That judgment recites that Wise was "informed of the right to counsel and that counsel would be appointed if [Wise] could not afford an attorney." The judgment further recites that Wise waived his right to counsel.
Respondent acknowledged the statements in the Nodaway County circuit...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State Ex Rel. Chris Koster v. the Honorable Warren Mcelwain
...Consideration of a petition for writ of habeas corpus is limited to determining the facial validity of the confinement. State ex rel. Nixon v. Jaynes, 73 S.W.3d 623, 624 (Mo. banc 2002). Certiorari is “available to correct judgments that are in excess or an abuse of jurisdiction, and that a......
-
State ex rel. Koster v. Oxenhandler
...Consideration of a petition for writ of habeas corpus is “limited to determining the facial validity of confinement.” State ex rel. Nixon v. Jaynes, 73 S.W.3d 623, 624 (Mo. banc 2002). “Under the statutes that have codified the common law writ, the ‘facial validity’ of confinement is determ......
-
State ex rel. Michael Anthony Taylor v. Steele
...But Taylor, as the habeas corpus petitioner, has the burden of proof to show that he is entitled to relief. State ex rel. Nixon v. Jaynes, 73 S.W.3d 623, 624 (Mo. banc 2002).IV. Case Law Subsequent To Taylor IA. Apprendi & Ring In Apprendi v. New Jersey, the United States Supreme Court held......
-
State ex rel. Hawley v. Jackson
...Consideration of a petition for writ of habeas corpus is "limited to determining the facial validity of confinement." State ex rel. Nixon v. Jaynes , 73 S.W.3d 623, 624 (Mo. banc 2002). "Under the statutes that have codified the common law writ, the ‘facial validity’ of confinement is deter......