Ex parte Custer

Annotate this Case

Ex parte Custer
1949 OK CR 23
203 P.2d 889
88 Okl.Cr. 161
Decided: 03/02/1949
Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals

(Syllabus.)

Habeas Corpus-Where Writ Granted, and District Court Delays Returning Prisoner for Pronouncing Proper Judgment, Prisoner Granted Outright Release From Penitentiary.

For former opinion, see 88 Okla. Cr. 154, 200 P.2d 781. Fred Custer, pro se.

Mae Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., and Sam H. Latti-more, Asst. Att.Nr. Gen., for respondent.

BRETT, J. It appearing that heretofore and on December 8, 1948, 88 Okla. Cr. 154, 200 P.2d 781, this court rendered its opinion in the above styled and iaum-bered matter, wherein it was ordered that the petition-er, Fred Custer, be remanded to the custody of the sher-iff of Washita county, Oklahoma, pending rendition of judgment in accordance with the provisions of Title 63, O.S.A. 1941 วง 417, 420. Said order was made and entered for the reason that in pronouncing judgment and sentence the aforesaid provisions of the statutes had not been followed and the petitioner had been sentenced to serve a term in the penitentiary one year in excess of the two years provided by law, and said judgment was therefore void. It further appears that since the rendition of said opinion the authorities of Washita county have made no

Page 162

effort to execute the order of this court for return of the said Fred Custer, the petitioner, for proper judgment and sentence, and the court is informed the said Washita county authorities do not desire to incur the expense in-cident to the procedure necessary for the pronouncement of a valid sentence; and it further Appearing that in the early part of April, 1949, the petitioner will have served the maximum of two years as provided by law, and having been prejudiced in his rights as to application for parole, because of said excessive sentence, is entitled to his immediate release under said writ of habeas corpus heretofore granted. The warden of the State Penitentiary should be and is hereby ordered and directed to release the said petitioner from his custody, subjeet of course to any holds that might be pending against him. Mandate forthwith.

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.