Ex parte FisherAnnotate this Case
Ex parte Fisher
1948 OK CR 109
199 P.2d 238
88 Okl.Cr. 1
Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals
( Syllabus. )
1. Habeas CorpusScope of Review When Inmate of Penitentiary Seeks Liberty. A petition for habeas corpus prepared by an inmate of the State Penitentiary will be liberally construed, and if it contains any allegation that by a reasonable inference indicates that inmate is illegally restrained of his liberty, Criminal Court of Appeals will assume original jurisdiction.
2. SameSole Question Whether Judgment Pronounced Against Accused Is Void. The sole question in habeas corpus proceeding instituted by an inmate in the State Penitentiary under commitment on plea of guilty to a felony charge in a district court is whether judgment pronounced against the inmate was void.
3. SameJudgment not Void if Court Had Jurisdiction, What ever Trial Errors May Have Occurred. If trial court had jurisdiction of the accused and crime charged against him, and did not exceed its lawful authority in passing sentence, its judgment is not void, and habeas corpus will not lie.
Original habeas corpus proceeding by Eugene D. Fisher, petitioner, to secure the petitioner's release from confinement in the State Penitentiary. Petition denied.
Eugene D. Fisher, petitioner, pro se.
Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., for respondent.
BAREFOOT, P. J. This is an original proceeding in habeas corpus, instituted by the petitioner, Eugene D.
Fisher, to secure his release from confinement in the State Penitentiary.
Attached to the petition is a copy of the judgment and sentence, and subsequent to the filing of the petition, the petitioner filed an affidavit in support thereof.
This petitioner comes into this court without an attorney, his petition and the affidavit having been prepared and filed by him.
The verified petition alleges, in substance, that on February 13, 1946, the petitioner was sentenced to serve a term of 25 years in the State Penitentiary by the district court of Bryan county on a charge of rape in the first degree, allegedly committed upon his minor stepdaughter in the month of December, 1945. Attached to his petition is a copy of the judgment and sentence, and what is termed a "supporting brief." This brief contains the statement: "The Hon. Victor C. Phillips represented the State as County Attorney, and your petitioner was not represented by counsel." In the affidavit filed by petitioner, he states: "The court appointed an attorney to represent me, and this attorney entered a plea of guilty for me." And further on: "And my court appointed lawyer recommended twenty to twenty-five years for me."
This court is very liberal in construing petitions filed by inmates of the state institutions which are prepared without the advice and assistance of an attorney. Ex parte Tollison, 73 Okla. Cr. 38, 117 P.2d 549; Ex parte Cassidy, 83 Okla. 159, 174 P.2d 271; Ex parte Smith, 84 Okla. Cr. 446, 184 P.2d 118; Ex parte Allen, 86 Okla. Cr. 48, 192 P.2d 289.
The only point raised is that petitioner was without counsel, and that the county attorney had agreed to recommend