Thomas v. Maggard
| Decision Date | 09 May 1958 |
| Citation | 313 S.W.2d 271 |
| Parties | M. W. THOMAS, Warden, and Jo M. Ferguson, Attorney General, Appellants, v. Floyd MAGGARD, Appellee. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky |
Jo M. Ferguson, Atty. Gen., Edward L. Fossett, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellants.
Isaac Turner, Hyden, for appellee.
CULLEN, Commissioner.
In July 1956, a judgment was entered in the Leslie Circuit Court convicting Floyd Maggard of the offense of armed robbery, and sentencing him to a term of 21 years in the state penitentiary, in Lyon County. In October 1957, Maggard sought a writ of habeas corpus from the Lyon Circuit Court, on the ground that the judgment of conviction and the sentence were void. The court sustained the ground, and entered judgment that Maggard be released from the penitentiary, but that he be delivered to the 'proper officers' of Leslie County 'for such proceedings as it may be proper to have against the petitioner.' The Attorney General and the Warden have appealed.
The statute governing armed robbery prescribes that the punishment shall be either life imprisonment or death. KRS 433.140. So the sentence of 21 years that was given Maggard was below the statutory minimum. The sentence further was unauthorized because it was imposed by the court without the intervention of a jury (upon a plea of guilty with advice of counsel). KRS 431.130, and Section 258 of the Criminal Code, authorize an agreement by the defendant, with advice of counsel, to waive a jury and permit the court to fix the punishment, but not in cases punishable by death.
Admittedly the judgment and sentence were erroneous. But the rule in this state is that habeas corpus is not available to obtain release from imprisonment under a judgment of conviction of a crime unless the judgment is void. Hoskins v. Buchanan, 311 Ky. 246, 223 S.W.2d 904. This Court also has adhered to the rule that a judgment of conviction of a crime is not void if the court had jurisdiction of the person of the defendant and of the offense charged. Owen v. Commonwealth, Ky., 280 S.W.2d 524. The latter rule may possibly be subject to some modification in a case where constitutional rights have been violated. See Berry v. Gray, Ky., 299 S.W.2d 124. However, no constitutional rights are involved here.
The general rule in other jurisdictions is that a judgment imposing a senctence less than the minimum authorized by statute is not void, and affords no ground for discharge on habeas corpus. 39 C.J.S. Habeas Corpus Sec. 26(f),...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Moss v. Jones
...unless the judgment is void. McLaughlin v. Barr, 191 Ky. 346, 230 S.W. 304; Hoskins v. Buchanan, 311 Ky. 246, 223 S.W.2d 904; Thomas v. Maggard, Ky., 313 S.W.2d 271. Further, the invalidating defects rendering the judgment void must be shown in the record of the trial. Smith v. Buchanan, 29......
-
Hicks v. Com.
...not render the conviction judgment void. See Lynch v. Jones, Ky., 342 S.W.2d 394; Williams v. Jones, Ky., 338 S.W.2d 693; Thomas v. Maggard, Ky., 313 S.W.2d 271. The same principle long has been accepted by the United States Supreme Court. See Adams v. U. S. ex rel. McCann, 317 U.S. 269 (19......
-
Juvenile v. Williams, 2001-SC-0645-DG.
...of habeas corpus limited the inquiry to whether the court had jurisdiction of the offense and the person of the accused. Thomas v. Maggard, Ky., 313 S.W.2d 271 (1958) (Judgment is not void if the court had jurisdiction of the person of the defendant and of the defense charged); Owen v. Comm......
-
M.M. v. Williams, 2001-SC-0645-DG.
...of habeas corpus limited the inquiry to whether the court had jurisdiction of the offense and the person of the accused. Thomas v. Maggard, Ky., 313 S.W.2d 271 (1958) (Judgment is not void if the court had jurisdiction of the person of the defendant and of the defense charged); Owen v. Comm......