Mora v. Tinsley

Supreme Court of Colorado

Mora v. Tinsley

407 P.2d 677, 158 Colo. 449

CourtSupreme Court of Colorado

DecidedNovember 15, 1965

DocketNo. 21326

StatusPublished

This text of 407 P.2d 677 (Mora 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

Mora v. Tinsley, 407 P.2d 677, 158 Colo. 449 (Colo. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Mr. Chief Justice Pringle.

The writ of error here issued to a judgment of the trial court denying a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed on behalf of Frank Y. Mora, the plaintiff in error.

Plaintiff in error states that the sole issue before this Court is whether he alleged sufficient facts in his petition for habeas corpus relief so as to require the trial court to issue the writ and conduct a hearing thereon. We have been advised by both counsel for the plaintiff in error and the Warden of the State Penitentiary that Mora escaped from the penitentiary and his whereabouts have been unknown for over a year. Under such circumstances, the issue here presented is moot, and an order of this court directing the trial court to issue the writ commanding the Warden to produce Mora for a hearing would be only an unwarranted and meaningless rhetorical flourish.

The writ of error is dismissed.

Mr. Justice Day and Mr. Justice McWilliams concur.

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

Opinion by

Mr. Chief Justice Pringle.

The writ of error here issued to a judgment of the trial court denying a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed on behalf of Frank Y. Mora, the plaintiff in error.

Plaintiff in error states that the sole issue before this Court is whether he alleged sufficient facts in his petition for habeas corpus relief so as to require the trial court to issue the writ and conduct a hearing thereon. We have been advised by both counsel for the plaintiff in error and the Warden of the State Penitentiary that Mora escaped from the penitentiary and his whereabouts have been unknown for over a year. Under such circumstances, the issue here presented is moot, and an order of this court directing the trial court to issue the writ commanding the Warden to produce Mora for a hearing would be only an unwarranted and meaningless rhetorical flourish.

The writ of error is dismissed.

Mr. Justice Day and Mr. Justice McWilliams concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

407 P.2d 677, 158 Colo. 449, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mora-v-tinsley-colo-1965.