Ex parte Scott

Annotate this Case

Ex parte Scott
1947 OK CR 113
185 P.2d 482
85 Okl.Cr. 103
Decided: 10/08/1947
Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals

(Syllabus.)

Habeas Corpus-Release From Penitentiary Dependent on Judgment and Sentence Being Void.

Page 104

Court of Appeals cannot weigh the evidence or modify the sentence which has been imposed against the accused, but may give relief from confinement in State Penitentiary only when the judgment and sentence pronounced against the accused are void.

Original proceeding in habeas corpus by Jim S. Scott to secure release from confinement. Writ denied.

Jim S. Scott, of McAlester, pro se.

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

JONES, J. This is an original action in habeas corpus instituted by the petitioner, Jim S. Scott, to secure his release from Confinement in the State Penitentiary.

In the verified petition it is alleged that the petitioner was sentenced on February 8, 1933, by the district court of Marshall county to serve 100 years in the State Penitentiary, upon a conviction for the crime of manslaughter in the first degree. It is further alleged that during the trial of the petitioner, the defendant was deprived of his right to introduce certain facts which would have been material to his plea of self-defense. It is further alleged that the sentence pronounced against the petitioner is excessive under the facts and circumstances of the case. The petition sets forth a lengthy narrative concerning the relationship which existed between the petitioner and the deceased, Abe Works, to show that the petitioner was justified in taking the life of the deceased.

The cause was submitted to this court upon a demurrer to the petition filed by the Attorney General upon behalf of the warden of the State Penitentiary.

The allegations in the petition as to the facts if sustained by the record would probably have obtained some reduction in the sentence pronounced against the petitioner, if the case had been appealed. However, in a

Page 105

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.