Ex Parte Willison

1930 OK 250, 288 P. 331, 143 Okla. 174, 1930 Okla. LEXIS 591
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedMay 20, 1930
Docket20958
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 1930 OK 250 (Ex Parte Willison) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court 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 Willison, 1930 OK 250, 288 P. 331, 143 Okla. 174, 1930 Okla. LEXIS 591 (Okla. 1930).

Opinion

HEFNER, J.

This is an application for a writ of 'habeas corpus. The petitioner was charged with robbery by firearms before the county judge of Craig county, sitting as a magistrate. The principal evidence against the petitioner was the testimony of an accomplice. The petitioner alleges that there was not sufficient corroboration of the testimony of the accomplice to show sufficient cause.

The petitioner also alleges that on the 4th day of November, 1929, he filed in the Criminal Court of Appeals his petition for writ of habeas corpus and that the same was heard before that court and after a hearing and a review of the evidence the court denied the petitioner his release. It is also stated that all of the evidence in the preliminary hearing was attached to the petititon for writ of habeas corpus filed with the clerk of the Criminal Court of Appeals.

The Criminal Court of Appeals in its opinion, after reviewing the evidence, said:

“Record examined, and held, that there was testimony before the examining magistrate tending to corroborate the testimony of the accomplice. * * *” Ex parte Eason et al. (Okla. Cr.) 282 Pac. 6584.

It is the duty of the Criminal Court of Appeals of this state to construe the criminal laws thereof, and since it held that there was testimony before the examining magistrate tending to corroborate the testimony of the accomplice, this court will follow the construction placed thereon by the Criminal Court of Appeals. The writ is denied.

MASON, O. .J., and CLARK, OULLISON, &WINDALL, and ANDREWS, JJ., concur. LESTER, Y. O. J., and HUNT and RILEY, JJ., absent.

Note. — See “Habeas Corpus,” 29 C. J. §203, p. 180, n. 33.

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

Related

Thrasher v. Act-Fast Labor Pool, Inc.
1991 OK 12 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1991)
Oklahoma Property Casualty Guarantee Ass'n v. Tipton
1990 OK CIV APP 107 (Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma, 1990)
Opinion No. 73-164 (1973) Ag
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1973
Coker-Mitchell Company v. State Industrial Court
1969 OK 30 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1969)
Bond Marble & Tile Office v. Rose
1958 OK 63 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1958)
LB JACKSON DRILLING COMPANY v. Prichard
1956 OK 344 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1956)
State Highway Dept. v. Elledge
1949 OK 160 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1949)
Deshazer v. National Biscuit Co.
1946 OK 35 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1946)
Sinclair Prairie Oil Co. v. Newport
1945 OK 199 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1945)
Beck v. Traders General Ins. Co.
1938 OK 103 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1938)
Keener Oil & Gas Co. v. Bushong
1936 OK 147 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1936)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1930 OK 250, 288 P. 331, 143 Okla. 174, 1930 Okla. LEXIS 591, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-willison-okla-1930.