Gibson v. Page

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Gibson v. Page

1968 OK CR 53, 438 P.2d 500, 1968 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 295

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedMarch 6, 1968

DocketNo. A-14541

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 1968 OK CR 53 (Gibson v. Page) 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

Gibson v. Page, 1968 OK CR 53, 438 P.2d 500, 1968 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 295 (Okla. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

BUSSEY, Judge.

This is an original proceeding in which petitioner seeks his release from confinement in the State Penitentiary at McAles-ter by virtue of a judgment and sentence rendered against him in the District Court of Tulsa County, Case No. 20,219. Petitioner gave no notice of intention to appeal, did not request casemade at public expense nor the appointment of counsel to represent him on appeal, but alleges in substance that at his trial, the trial court improperly admitted into evidence an alleged confession made by him to certain police officers.

It appearing that the trial court had jurisdiction of the person, subject matter, and authority under law to pronounce the judgment and sentence imposed, and the Court, following the rule that habeas corpus is not a substitute for appeal, we are of the opinion that the writ prayed for should be denied without prejudice to petitioner filing a subsequent application for post conviction appeal. Writ denied.

BRETT, J., and NIX, P. J., concur.

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION

BUSSEY, Judge.

This is an original proceeding in which petitioner seeks his release from confinement in the State Penitentiary at McAles-ter by virtue of a judgment and sentence rendered against him in the District Court of Tulsa County, Case No. 20,219. Petitioner gave no notice of intention to appeal, did not request casemade at public expense nor the appointment of counsel to represent him on appeal, but alleges in substance that at his trial, the trial court improperly admitted into evidence an alleged confession made by him to certain police officers.

It appearing that the trial court had jurisdiction of the person, subject matter, and authority under law to pronounce the judgment and sentence imposed, and the Court, following the rule that habeas corpus is not a substitute for appeal, we are of the opinion that the writ prayed for should be denied without prejudice to petitioner filing a subsequent application for post conviction appeal. Writ denied.

BRETT, J., and NIX, P. J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1968 OK CR 53, 438 P.2d 500, 1968 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 295, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gibson-v-page-oklacrimapp-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack