Johnson v. State
This text of 769 S.W.2d 3 (Johnson v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
Appellant filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus alleging that he was convicted and sentenced in municipal court and later convicted and sentenced in circuit court on the same facts. The circuit court declined to issue the writ. We affirm.
The issue on appeal is whether the petitioner established that he was being held without lawful authority. Ark. Code Ann. § 16-112-103(a) (1987). One is held without lawful authority when it is shown that: (1) The commitment is invalid on its face; or (2) the court lacked jurisdiction. George v. State, 285 Ark. 84, 685 S.W.2d 141 (1985). Neither of these conditions was met in this case.
(1) Commitment Invalid on Its Face. Appellant makes no assertion that the commitment was invalid on its face.
(2) Court Lacked Jurisdiction. At the time of the second conviction, the one in circuit court, the trial court had personal jurisdiction over the appellant and also had jurisdiction over the subject matter, and had authority to render the particular judgment. Thus, the trial court had jurisdiction and habeas corpus will not issue. See Goodman v. State, 221 Ark. 308, 254 S.W.2d 63 (1952).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
769 S.W.2d 3, 298 Ark. 479, 1989 Ark. LEXIS 197, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-state-ark-1989.