Ex Parte Merritt

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Ex Parte Merritt

1948 OK CR 92, 198 P.2d 231, 87 Okla. Crim. 385, 1948 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 240

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedSeptember 29, 1948

DocketNo. A-11076.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 1948 OK CR 92 (Ex Parte Merritt) 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 Merritt, 1948 OK CR 92, 198 P.2d 231, 87 Okla. Crim. 385, 1948 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 240 (Okla. Ct. App. 1948).

Pincite

Opinion

JONES, J.

This is an original action styled “Petition in Habeas Corpus for Reduction of Sentence” instituted by the petitioner, Wiley Merritt, who is now an inmate of the State Penitentiary at McAlester. The *386 Attorney .General on behalf of the respondent, warden of the State Penitentiary, has filed a demurrer to the petition.

The verified petition alleges that the petitioner was convicted in the district court of Comanche county of the crime of robbery with firearms and sentenced to serve 15 years’ imprisonment in the State Penitentiary. There are set forth in the petition, numerous allegations of fact supported by written statements of individuals attached to the petition for the purpose of showing that on the date of the alleged crime the petitioner was in the State of Texas working at a cafe in Dallas, and was therefore not guilty of the crime. It was also shown by the record that this defense was presented to the jury and disregarded. by them. There is a strong showing, including a letter from the county attorney from Comanche county, indicating a belief that the petitioner was innocent of the crime. The county attorney who wrote the letter, however, was the attorney who represented the defendant at the trial and was not the county official who conducted the prosecution.

It is established law that on application for writ of habeas corpus, the Criminal Court of Appeals is without jurisdiction to modify the petitioner’s sentence. Ex parte Wright, 73 Okla. Cr. 167, 119 P. 2d 97; Ex parte Cassidy, 83 Okla. Cr. 159, 174 P. 2d 271.

This court is limited in habeas corpus cases, brought by an inmate of the penitentiary seeking release from custody, to an examination of the record to determine whether the judgment and sentence under which the inmate of the penitentiary is serving is void. In the instant case the punishment assessed in accordance with the verdict of the jury was within the limitations fixed *387 by statute upon a conviction for a crime of robbery with firearms. Tit. 21 O. S. 1941 § 801.

Since the relief sought is for a reduction of sentence based upon the alleged innocence of the petitioner so that with the reduced sentence he would be eligible for release from the State Penitentiary, it is evident that the relief sought cannot be granted.

The writ of habeas corpus is therefore denied.

BAREFOOT, P. J., and BRETT, J., concur.

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

JONES, J.

This is an original action styled “Petition in Habeas Corpus for Reduction of Sentence” instituted by the petitioner, Wiley Merritt, who is now an inmate of the State Penitentiary at McAlester. The *386 Attorney .General on behalf of the respondent, warden of the State Penitentiary, has filed a demurrer to the petition.

The verified petition alleges that the petitioner was convicted in the district court of Comanche county of the crime of robbery with firearms and sentenced to serve 15 years’ imprisonment in the State Penitentiary. There are set forth in the petition, numerous allegations of fact supported by written statements of individuals attached to the petition for the purpose of showing that on the date of the alleged crime the petitioner was in the State of Texas working at a cafe in Dallas, and was therefore not guilty of the crime. It was also shown by the record that this defense was presented to the jury and disregarded. by them. There is a strong showing, including a letter from the county attorney from Comanche county, indicating a belief that the petitioner was innocent of the crime. The county attorney who wrote the letter, however, was the attorney who represented the defendant at the trial and was not the county official who conducted the prosecution.

It is established law that on application for writ of habeas corpus, the Criminal Court of Appeals is without jurisdiction to modify the petitioner’s sentence. Ex parte Wright, 73 Okla. Cr. 167, 119 P. 2d 97; Ex parte Cassidy, 83 Okla. Cr. 159, 174 P. 2d 271.

This court is limited in habeas corpus cases, brought by an inmate of the penitentiary seeking release from custody, to an examination of the record to determine whether the judgment and sentence under which the inmate of the penitentiary is serving is void. In the instant case the punishment assessed in accordance with the verdict of the jury was within the limitations fixed *387 by statute upon a conviction for a crime of robbery with firearms. Tit. 21 O. S. 1941 § 801.

Since the relief sought is for a reduction of sentence based upon the alleged innocence of the petitioner so that with the reduced sentence he would be eligible for release from the State Penitentiary, it is evident that the relief sought cannot be granted.

The writ of habeas corpus is therefore denied.

BAREFOOT, P. J., and BRETT, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1948 OK CR 92, 198 P.2d 231, 87 Okla. Crim. 385, 1948 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 240, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-merritt-oklacrimapp-1948.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack