Ex parte Arnett

Ex parte Arnett
1943 OK CR 39
135 P.2d 507
76 Okl.Cr. 209
Decided: 03/24/1943
Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals

(Syllabus.)

1. Habeas Corpus-Writ May not Be Used as Substitute for Appeal. The writ of habeas corpus cannot be used to perform the office of a writ of error on appeal, but is limited to cases in which the judgment and sentence of the court attacked is clearly void.

Page 210

2. Same Petition Insufficient on Its Face to Justify Release From Custody. Where copy of judgment and sentence is not attached to petition, and there is nothing from which this court may ascertain the nature of the crime, the number of years sentenced, nor the court from which petitioner was committed, it is insufficient upon its face to entitle petitioner to release from custody.

Original habeas corpus proceeding by Harlan Arnett to secure release from the State Penitentiary. Writ denied.

Harlan Arnett, in pro. per.

Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., for respondent.

JONES, P. J. This is an original proceeding in habeas corpus by one Harlan Arnett to secure his release from confinement in the State Penitentiary at McAlester.

No copy of the judgment and sentence pronounced against petitioner is attached to his petition and the petition does not recite the number of years for which he stands committed, the crime for which he was convicted, nor the court from which he was sentenced. It merely alleges in general terms that the petitioner's conviction was unlawful because he had once been placed in jeopardy, and, secondly, that the court kept the jury together an unreasonable length of time in order to secure a verdict of guilty.

In Ex parte Shockley, 75 Okla. Cr. 263, 130 P.2d 331, this court held:

"The writ of habeas corpus cannot be used to perform the office of a writ of error on appeal, but is limited to cases in which the judgment and sentence of the court attacked is clearly void."

See, also, Ex parte Tollison, 73 Okla. Cr. 38, 117 P.2d 549.

There are no sufficient facts stated in the petition

Page 211

which would justify this court in assuming jurisdiction to hear the matter.

The writ of habeas corpus is denied.