Stewart v. State

• Decision Date: 17 March 1915
• Docket Number: A-1824,A-2416.
• Citation: 146 P. 921,11 Okla.Crim. 400,1915 OK CR 22
• Parties: STEWART v. STATE. EX PARTE STEWART.
• Court: United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

146 P. 921

11 Okla.Crim. 400, 1915 OK CR 22

STEWART v. STATE.

EX PARTE STEWART.

Nos. A-1824, A-2416.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

March 17, 1915

Syllabus by the Court.

A "pardon" is an act of grace and mercy bestowed by the state through its chief executive upon offenders against its laws after conviction, and a full, unconditional pardon reaches both the punishment prescribed for the offense and the guilt of the offender; it obliterates, in legal contemplation, the offense itself, and hence its effect is to make the offender a new man.

A pardon takes effect upon delivery either to the person who is the subject of the favor or to some one acting for him or in his behalf.

This court has no power to control or in any manner interfere with the functions of the executive department of the state government, but it has jurisdiction and power to inquire upon habeas corpus into the validity of a pardon under which the petitioner seeks to be discharged from the penitentiary where after the delivery of the pardon he is detained in the custody of the warden upon an order of the Governor purporting to revoke the pardon.

The pardon in this case was granted by the Lieutenant Governor acting as Governor in the absence of the Governor from the state. Held, that under the Constitution, art. 6, § 16 (165 Williams'), in the absence of the Governor from the state for any purpose or for any period of time, the constitutional functions of his office devolve pro tempore upon the Lieutenant Governor, and a pardon granted and delivered by the Lieutenant Governor as acting Governor, in the absence of the Governor from the state, is a valid and effectual pardon. A fortiori the warden has no authority to disregard it, and the Governor's order purporting to revoke such pardon was necessarily a nullity.

When an appeal from a judgment of conviction is pending in this court, and the plaintiff in error applies for a pardon, and the same is granted, and the fact that a pardon has been granted is brought to the attention of this court, the appeal will be dismissed as having been abandoned.

Appeal from District Court, Choctaw County; Sumners Hardy, Judge.

Sam Stewart was convicted of murder, and pending appeal applies for a writ of habeas corpus. Appeal dismissed as having been abandoned, and petitioner discharged.

Stewart & McDonald, of Hugo, for plaintiff in error.

The Attorney General, for the State.

DOYLE P.J.

Plaintiff in error, Sam Stewart, and Mattie Jones were jointly indicted for the murder of Henry Jones. Upon their trial the jury returned a verdict finding Sam Stewart guilty of murder and assessing his punishment at imprisonment in the penitentiary for life, and disagreeing as to the guilt of Mattie Jones. On April 6, 1912, judgment was rendered, and he was duly sentenced to life imprisonment, and was placed in the penitentiary to undergo said punishment. To reverse the judgment an appeal was perfected. Pending the determination of said appeal on the 30th day of ...