State v. Fox
| Decision Date | 28 December 1966 |
| Citation | 245 Or. 440,421 P.2d 977 |
| Parties | STATE of Oregon, Respondent, v. Walter FOX, Appellant. |
| Court | Oregon Supreme Court |
Walter Fox, in pro. per.
No appearance for respondent.
Before McALLISTER, C.J., and PERRY, SLOAN, O'CONNELL, GOODWIN, DENECKE and HOLMAN, JJ.
The defendant, Walter Fox, was convicted in Jackson county of the crime of uttering and publishing a forged check, was sentenced to the penitentiary for a term of six years, and appeals.
Defendant personally filed the notice of appeal. The attorney who had represented defendant in the trial court was appointed to handle his appeal. Later that attorney was permitted to resign upon his showing that he could find no merit in the appeal. The court below then appointed a Deputy Public Defender, who in turn was allowed to withdraw upon his showing that he could find no meritorious grounds for appeal.
The defendant then filed a brief Pro se. He raises no question about the proceedings in Jackson county. He challenges only the legality of his extradition from Maryland to answer the charge or which he was indicted and convicted. There is no merit in any of defendant's contentions. The extradition proceedings, if defective, should have been challenged in the asylum state. When Oregon, the demanding state, has custody of the prisoner within its borders, it will not inquire into the method by which such custody was obtained. Knowles v. Gladden, 227 Or. 408, 413, 362 P.2d 763 (1961), cert. den. 368 U.S. 999, 83 S.Ct. 627, 7 L.Ed.2d 537; Anderson ex rel. Poe v. Gladden, 205 Or. 538, 546, 288 P.2d 823 (1955), cert. den. 350 U.S. 974, 76 S.Ct. 451, 100 L.Ed. 845; Macomber v. Alexander, 197 Or. 685, 702, 255 P.2d 164 (1953); State v. Owen, 119 Or. 15, 24--28, 244 P. 516 (1926); Frisbie v. Collins, 342 U.S. 519, 72 S.Ct. 509, 96 L.Ed. 541, rehearing den. 343 U.S. 937, 72 S.Ct. 768, 96 L.Ed. 1344 (1952); 4 Anderson, Wharton's Criminal Law and Procedure, § 1484 (1957).
The judgment is affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Suggs v. United States
...are underscored by the order in Fox v. Oregon, 388 U.S. 466, 87 S.Ct. 2129, 18 L.Ed. 1324 (1967), whereby the judgment in Oregon v. Fox, 421 P.2d 977 (Ore.Sup.Ct.1966)7 was vacated and remanded for further consideration in the light of It is said, why should not the Government "adopt" the "......
-
State v. Fox
...upon his showing that he could find no meritorious ground for the appeal. Fox then filed a brief Pro se. We affirmed. State v. Fox, 245 Or. 440, 421 P.2d 977 (1967). Because Fox was not represented by counsel on appeal, the Supreme Court of the United States, 388 U.S. 466, 87 S.Ct. 2129, 18......