Ex Parte Gladys Hicks

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Ex Parte Gladys Hicks

1921 OK CR 140, 198 P. 97, 19 Okla. Crim. 302, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 24

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJuly 30, 1921

DocketNo. A-3645.

StatusPublished

This text of 1921 OK CR 140 (Ex Parte Gladys Hicks) 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 Gladys Hicks, 1921 OK CR 140, 198 P. 97, 19 Okla. Crim. 302, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 24 (Okla. Ct. App. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In the proceeding, Gladys Hicks, by her counsel, presented to this court a verified petition, wherein she alleges that she is illegally restrained of her liberty by A. J. Brown, chief of police of Anadarko; that her illegal de *303 tention consists in this: that she was tried and pronounced guilty on a charge of vagrancy by the mayor of said city, and fined in the sum of $100, and was informed that if she would pay $50 she would be released, provided she would leave the city and not return; that she paid said sum of $50 and the next day said chief of police again took her in charge; that said restraint is unlawful and unauthorized for the reason that said mayor was without authority to impose a fine of $100, therefore the commitment issued is void, in that it deprives petitioner for her liberty without due process of law.

This presents the identical question passed upon in the case of Ex parte Johnson, 13 Okla. Cr. 30, 171 Pac. 1097; Ex parte Monroe, 13 Okla. Cr. 62, 162 Pac. 233. For the reasons stated therein, we are of the opinion that under the proceedings had petitioner was deprived of her liberty without due process of law, and that the writ should be allowed and petitioner discharged.

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

PER CURIAM.

In the proceeding, Gladys Hicks, by her counsel, presented to this court a verified petition, wherein she alleges that she is illegally restrained of her liberty by A. J. Brown, chief of police of Anadarko; that her illegal de *303 tention consists in this: that she was tried and pronounced guilty on a charge of vagrancy by the mayor of said city, and fined in the sum of $100, and was informed that if she would pay $50 she would be released, provided she would leave the city and not return; that she paid said sum of $50 and the next day said chief of police again took her in charge; that said restraint is unlawful and unauthorized for the reason that said mayor was without authority to impose a fine of $100, therefore the commitment issued is void, in that it deprives petitioner for her liberty without due process of law.

This presents the identical question passed upon in the case of Ex parte Johnson, 13 Okla. Cr. 30, 171 Pac. 1097; Ex parte Monroe, 13 Okla. Cr. 62, 162 Pac. 233. For the reasons stated therein, we are of the opinion that under the proceedings had petitioner was deprived of her liberty without due process of law, and that the writ should be allowed and petitioner discharged.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1921 OK CR 140, 198 P. 97, 19 Okla. Crim. 302, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 24, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-gladys-hicks-oklacrimapp-1921.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack