Muckle v. Aldredge
This text of 20 S.E.2d 79 (Muckle v. Aldredge) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1. The contentions of the plaintiff in habeas corpus, that he was entitled to his release, on the ground that he had been granted a pardon “conditioned upon his obeying all the laws of this State, of the United States and of any other State, and further that this conditioned pardon shall be revocable at the pleasure of the Governor,” were not sustainable, it appearing that the prisoner was held under a warrant issued by the judge after hearing evidence which justified the court in finding that the conditions under which the pardon was granted had been violated. Muckle v. Clarke, 191 Ga. 202 (12 S. E. 2d, 339); Huff v. Aldredge, 192 Ga. 12 (14 S. E. 2d, 456); Muckle v. Aldredge, 192 Ga. 426 (15 S. E. 2d, 605); Allman v. Aldredge, 192 Ga. 431 (15 S. E. 2d, 710); Moore v. Lawrence, 192 Ga. 441 (15 S. E. 2d, 519); Pippin v. Johnson, 192 Ga. 450 (15 S. E. 2d, 712) ; Pappas v. Aldredge, 192 Ga. 482 (15 S. E. 2d, 718) ; Derricott v. Aldredge, 192 Ga. 749 (16 S. E. 2d, 561).
2. It was not erroneous to refuse the application.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
20 S.E.2d 79, 193 Ga. 782, 1942 Ga. LEXIS 480, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/muckle-v-aldredge-ga-1942.