Ex Parte Henson

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Ex Parte Henson

1921 OK CR 16, 194 P. 1118, 18 Okla. Crim. 715, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 192

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedJanuary 26, 1921

DocketA-3233

StatusPublished

This text of 1921 OK CR 16 (Ex Parte Henson) 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 Henson, 1921 OK CR 16, 194 P. 1118, 18 Okla. Crim. 715, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 192 (Okla. Ct. App. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

On January 4, 1918, petitioner filed his application for a writ of 'babeas corpus to be admitted to bail, alleging that he wag at that time unlawfully restrained of his liberty vin the county jail of Lincoln county, Okla., by J. H. Lockwood, sheriff of said county, on a charge then pending in said county, wherein petitioner was accused of the murder of one Ivan Stewart. On January 5, 1918, a rule to show cause why the writ should not issue as prayed for was issued, returnable on the 12th day of January. 1918. On said latter date, hearing of the application was continued by agreement of the parties until .the 3d day of June, 1918. Thereafter petitioner filed a motion to dismiss the petition, which is as follows: “Cornea now Jake Henson, by his attorney, George B. Rittenhouse, and shows to the court that there was filed in the above entitled cause a petition for writ of habeas corpus, and an order was issued on said writ; that subsequent to the filing of said petition and, the issuance of said order the said Jake Henson pleadcdl guilty in the district court of Oklahoma county and was sentenced to a term in the penitentiary, and is now serving such term. Wherefore your petitioner moves to dismiss the petition in the above-entitled cause, and to recall any and all orders made in said cause.” Motion sustained, and petition dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM.

On January 4, 1918, petitioner filed his application for a writ of 'babeas corpus to be admitted to bail, alleging that he wag at that time unlawfully restrained of his liberty vin the county jail of Lincoln county, Okla., by J. H. Lockwood, sheriff of said county, on a charge then pending in said county, wherein petitioner was accused of the murder of one Ivan Stewart. On January 5, 1918, a rule to show cause why the writ should not issue as prayed for was issued, returnable on the 12th day of January. 1918. On said latter date, hearing of the application was continued by agreement of the parties until .the 3d day of June, 1918. Thereafter petitioner filed a motion to dismiss the petition, which is as follows: “Cornea now Jake Henson, by his attorney, George B. Rittenhouse, and shows to the court that there was filed in the above entitled cause a petition for writ of habeas corpus, and an order was issued on said writ; that subsequent to the filing of said petition and, the issuance of said order the said Jake Henson pleadcdl guilty in the district court of Oklahoma county and was sentenced to a term in the penitentiary, and is now serving such term. Wherefore your petitioner moves to dismiss the petition in the above-entitled cause, and to recall any and all orders made in said cause.” Motion sustained, and petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1921 OK CR 16, 194 P. 1118, 18 Okla. Crim. 715, 1921 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 192, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-henson-oklacrimapp-1921.