Ex Parte Bartos

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Ex Parte Bartos

1917 OK CR 6, 161 P. 1198, 13 Okla. Crim. 49, 1917 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 17

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJanuary 9, 1917

DocketNo. A-2854.

StatusPublished

This text of 1917 OK CR 6 (Ex Parte Bartos) 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

Ex Parte Bartos, 1917 OK CR 6, 161 P. 1198, 13 Okla. Crim. 49, 1917 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 17 (Okla. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The petition filed in behalf of J. E. Bartos alleges in substance that he is illegally restrained and unlawfully imprisoned in the city jail in Shawnee by C. C. Hawk, chief of police of said city, by virtue of a commitment issued on a judgment wherein petitioner was sentenced to pay á fine of $20; that said city was *50 without authority to'pass or enforce said purported ordi-nhnce under which petitioner was convicted, and the same is void. Thé court refuses to issue the writ for the-reason that it is not shown by the allegations of the petition that the same had been presented to either the county-court or judge thereof, or the district court or district judge, before being filed in this court, as required by the-rules of this court. The writ is therefore denied.

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

PER CURIAM.

The petition filed in behalf of J. E. Bartos alleges in substance that he is illegally restrained and unlawfully imprisoned in the city jail in Shawnee by C. C. Hawk, chief of police of said city, by virtue of a commitment issued on a judgment wherein petitioner was sentenced to pay á fine of $20; that said city was *50 without authority to'pass or enforce said purported ordi-nhnce under which petitioner was convicted, and the same is void. Thé court refuses to issue the writ for the-reason that it is not shown by the allegations of the petition that the same had been presented to either the county-court or judge thereof, or the district court or district judge, before being filed in this court, as required by the-rules of this court. The writ is therefore denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1917 OK CR 6, 161 P. 1198, 13 Okla. Crim. 49, 1917 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 17, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-bartos-oklacrimapp-1917.