Enriquez v. District Court of Oklahoma County

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Enriquez v. District Court of Oklahoma County

1967 OK CR 142, 430 P.2d 859, 1967 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 433

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJuly 26, 1967

DocketNo. A-14255

StatusPublished

This text of 1967 OK CR 142 (Enriquez v. District Court of Oklahoma County) 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

Enriquez v. District Court of Oklahoma County, 1967 OK CR 142, 430 P.2d 859, 1967 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 433 (Okla. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

NIX, Presiding Judge.

This is an original proceedings filed by the petitioner, Jessie Ray Enriquez, Jr., for Post-Conviction Appeal. His only stated reason being that his co-defendant was given a five year term, but he received a ten year sentence. He alleges he did not know of his right to appeal. The law is well-settled that the petitioner should have filed an application to withdraw his plea of guilty, and enter a plea of not guilty, and proceed to trial, if he was dissatisfied with the sentence. If this had been denied, he would then have the basis for an appeal to this Court. However, on a plea of guilty, the only questions to bring before this Court are jurisdictional, and can be reached through habeas corpus.

This Court is of the opinion that petitioner fails to allege a violation of any of his rights relating to his right to appeal. Therefore, the demurrer filed by the state is hereby sustained, and the writ denied.

BUSSEY and BRETT, JJ., concur.

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION

NIX, Presiding Judge.

This is an original proceedings filed by the petitioner, Jessie Ray Enriquez, Jr., for Post-Conviction Appeal. His only stated reason being that his co-defendant was given a five year term, but he received a ten year sentence. He alleges he did not know of his right to appeal. The law is well-settled that the petitioner should have filed an application to withdraw his plea of guilty, and enter a plea of not guilty, and proceed to trial, if he was dissatisfied with the sentence. If this had been denied, he would then have the basis for an appeal to this Court. However, on a plea of guilty, the only questions to bring before this Court are jurisdictional, and can be reached through habeas corpus.

This Court is of the opinion that petitioner fails to allege a violation of any of his rights relating to his right to appeal. Therefore, the demurrer filed by the state is hereby sustained, and the writ denied.

BUSSEY and BRETT, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1967 OK CR 142, 430 P.2d 859, 1967 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 433, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/enriquez-v-district-court-of-oklahoma-county-oklacrimapp-1967.