Hamby v. State

Wyoming Supreme Court

Hamby v. State

559 P.2d 1388, 1977 Wyo. LEXIS 230

CourtWyoming Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 17, 1977

Docket4654, 4664

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 559 P.2d 1388 (Hamby v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wyoming Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hamby v. State, 559 P.2d 1388, 1977 Wyo. LEXIS 230 (Wyo. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellants-defendants were punished administratively for escaping from the Wyoming State Penitentiary by loss of “good time” previously granted as a matter of grace under § 7-325(c), W.S.1957, 1975 Cum.Supp., and were subsequently convicted in the district court of, and sentenced for, the crime of escape from a penal institution, arising from the same factual circumstances, in violation of § 6-167, W.S. 1957, 1975 Cum.Supp. Since the cases raise the same issue pertaining to double jeopardy, they have been consolidated for purposes of this appeal.

We hold, as have innumerable jurisdictions, that a criminal prosecution for prison escape is not barred by a plea of former jeopardy based on disciplinary punishment previously imposed by prison authorities for the same escape; e. g., Alex v. State, 484 P.2d 677 (Alaska 1971); Collins v. State, 215 Kan. 489, 524 P.2d 715 (1974); State v. Millican, 84 N.M. 256, 501 P.2d 1076 (1972); Hutchison v. United States, 450 F.2d 930 (10th Cir. 1971); and United States v. Hedges, 458 F.2d 188 (10th Cir. 1972).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellants-defendants were punished administratively for escaping from the Wyoming State Penitentiary by loss of “good time” previously granted as a matter of grace under § 7-325(c), W.S.1957, 1975 Cum.Supp., and were subsequently convicted in the district court of, and sentenced for, the crime of escape from a penal institution, arising from the same factual circumstances, in violation of § 6-167, W.S. 1957, 1975 Cum.Supp. Since the cases raise the same issue pertaining to double jeopardy, they have been consolidated for purposes of this appeal.

We hold, as have innumerable jurisdictions, that a criminal prosecution for prison escape is not barred by a plea of former jeopardy based on disciplinary punishment previously imposed by prison authorities for the same escape; e. g., Alex v. State, 484 P.2d 677 (Alaska 1971); Collins v. State, 215 Kan. 489, 524 P.2d 715 (1974); State v. Millican, 84 N.M. 256, 501 P.2d 1076 (1972); Hutchison v. United States, 450 F.2d 930 (10th Cir. 1971); and United States v. Hedges, 458 F.2d 188 (10th Cir. 1972).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

559 P.2d 1388, 1977 Wyo. LEXIS 230, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hamby-v-state-wyo-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack