Dukes v. Page

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Dukes v. Page

1967 OK CR 31, 424 P.2d 989, 1967 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 313

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedMarch 8, 1967

DocketNo. A-14096

StatusPublished

This text of 1967 OK CR 31 (Dukes v. Page) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dukes v. Page, 1967 OK CR 31, 424 P.2d 989, 1967 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 313 (Okla. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

BUSSEY, Judge.

Matthew Dukes was charged with the crime of Murder in the District Court of Oklahoma County. He was represented by two attorneys whom he employed, and entered a plea of guilty to said charge, whereupon he was sentenced to a term of life imprisonment in the State Penitentiary. Neither Dukes nor his attorneys gave notice of intention to appeal his judgment and sentence, nor was an appeal ever perfected within the time provided by law.

Petitioner does not allege that he was denied any right relating to his appeal, but asserts that had he proceeded to trial, he would have offered the jury evidence in defense and mitigation of the homicide. Petitioner does not allege any facts upon which relief by way of habeas corpus or post conviction review can be granted. The relief prayed for is accordingly denied.

NIX, P. J., concurs. BRETT, J., not participating.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MEMORANDUM OPINION

BUSSEY, Judge.

Matthew Dukes was charged with the crime of Murder in the District Court of Oklahoma County. He was represented by two attorneys whom he employed, and entered a plea of guilty to said charge, whereupon he was sentenced to a term of life imprisonment in the State Penitentiary. Neither Dukes nor his attorneys gave notice of intention to appeal his judgment and sentence, nor was an appeal ever perfected within the time provided by law.

Petitioner does not allege that he was denied any right relating to his appeal, but asserts that had he proceeded to trial, he would have offered the jury evidence in defense and mitigation of the homicide. Petitioner does not allege any facts upon which relief by way of habeas corpus or post conviction review can be granted. The relief prayed for is accordingly denied.

NIX, P. J., concurs. BRETT, J., not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1967 OK CR 31, 424 P.2d 989, 1967 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 313, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dukes-v-page-oklacrimapp-1967.