In re Key

In re Key
1948 OK CR 10
189 P.2d 619
86 Okl.Cr. 81
Decided: 01/28/1948
Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals

(Syllabus.)

1. Bail-When Sail May Be Granted. Bail by sufficient sureties may be admitted upon all arrests in criminal cases where the punishment may be death, or life imprisonment, unless the proof is evident or the presumption thereof great.

2. Same-Petitioner Entitled to Bail in Sum of $20,000. Application for writ of habeas corpus praying for grant of bail, pending trial on charge of murder in the district court, examined and after hearing thereon, held, petitioner entitled to bail in the sum of $20,000.

Proceedings in the matter of the application of Alf Key for writ of habeas corpus to be released from the common jail of Garvin county, Okla., or granted bail in a reasonable sum. Bail allowed.

Frank Grayson, of Oklahoma City, and Kirksey Nix, of McAlester, for petitioner.

Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., Fermon Hatcher, County Atty., of Pauls Valley, and Anita Ellerbee, Asst. County Atty., Garvin County, for respondent.

BRETT, J. The petitioner, Alf Key, was charged in Garvin county, Okla., with the crime of murder. At the preliminary examination he was held to the district court without bail and information was filed against him in the district court of Garvin county, August 7, 1947, and said

Page 82

Alf Key is now confined in the county jail of Garvin county, at Pauls Valley, Okla.

Application was made to the district court of Garvin county for a writ of habeas corpus and a hearing had thereon and the petitioner, Alf Key, was denied bail.

He has filed his application in this court for a writ of habeas corpus stating that he is not guilty of the crime of murder, as charged, and that proof of his guilt of the charge of murder is not evident nor that the presumption thereof great. This petition was heard by agreement of the parties in this court on October 27, 1947.

It is unnecessary to give a detailed statement of the testimony presented at the hearing before this court. A transcript of the testimony and evidence taken at the preliminary examination and in the district court, on application for writ of habeas corpus, was introduced and oral testimony was also heard by this court. The evidence in the transcript from the proceedings below and the oral testimony taken in this court are sufficient to raise the presumption of a probable case of accidental and not a premeditated and intentional homicide. Upon a careful examination of the evidence and all of the facts, we are of the opinion that proof of petitioner's guilt is not evident nor the presumption thereof great.