King v. Tinsley

405 P.2d 689, 158 Colo. 99, 1965 Colo. LEXIS 550
CourtSupreme Court of Colorado
DecidedSeptember 13, 1965
Docket21615
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 405 P.2d 689 (King v. Tinsley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Colorado primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
King v. Tinsley, 405 P.2d 689, 158 Colo. 99, 1965 Colo. LEXIS 550 (Colo. 1965).

Opinion

*100 Mr. Justice Frantz

delivered the opinion of the Court.

This writ of error is directed to the trial court’s denial of King’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Originally, King pled guilty to a charge of illegal possession of narcotics. In his present petition he alleges that the evidence of the crime was obtained as a result of an unreasonable search and seizure and that his counsel at trial knew this but nevertheless “induced” him to enter a plea of guilty.

Where a petition for habeas corpus itself shows that the party can neither be discharged nor admitted to bail nor in any other manner be relieved, the trial court should summarily deny the petition. C.R.S. 1963, 65-1-1; Bizup v. Tinsley, 155 Colo. 131, 393 P.2d 556. King’s petition raises no question of the trial court’s jurisdiction of the person or of the offense or of the sentence not being within the limits prescribed by law. Habeas corpus, therefore, is not the proper remedy for redress of his alleged grievance. Specht v. Tinsley, 153 Colo. 235, 385 P.2d 423; Titmus v. Tinsley, 153 Colo. 96, 384 P.2d 728.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

Andretti v. Johnson
779 P.2d 382 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1989)
Reed v. People
745 P.2d 235 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1987)
Ryan v. Cronin
553 P.2d 754 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
405 P.2d 689, 158 Colo. 99, 1965 Colo. LEXIS 550, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-v-tinsley-colo-1965.