In Re Arthur

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

In Re Arthur

1942 OK CR 156, 131 P.2d 135, 75 Okla. Crim. 315, 1942 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 52

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedNovember 18, 1942

DocketNo. A-10325.

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 1942 OK CR 156 (In Re Arthur) 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

In Re Arthur, 1942 OK CR 156, 131 P.2d 135, 75 Okla. Crim. 315, 1942 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 52 (Okla. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

JONES, J.

The petitioner, Buber Arthur, has filed his verified application for a writ of habeas corpus, wherein it is alleged that he is unlawfully imprisoned in the State Penitentiary at McAlester, under a commitment issued from the district court of Greer county, upon a plea of guilty for the crime of murder.

The facts alleged in said petition are substantially the same as the facts alleged in the petition by the petitioner heretofore presented to- this court and which was denied. Ex parte Arthur, 60 Okla. Cr. 287, 64 P. 2d 344.

A demurrer to- the petition was interposed on behalf of respondent.

The rule of this court is that where an application for writ of habeas corpus has been denied, this court will not ordinarily entertain a subsequent application for a writ based on the same grounds and the same facts, or any other grounds or facts existing when the first application was made, whether presented then or not. Ex parte Berrie, 75 Okla. Cr. 115, 129 P. 2d 88.

*316 Fop the reasons above stated, the demurrer to the •petition is sustained and the canse is dismissed.

BAREFOOT, P. J., and DOYLE, J., concur.

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