PLUNKET v. Lane
This text of 207 N.E.2d 215 (PLUNKET v. Lane) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Petitioner has filed pro se in this court a pleading entitled “Verified Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus.” Petitioner pleaded guilty to a charge of second degree burglary, for which he was convicted. The pleading constitutes an attempt to attack the validity of *531 petitioner’s commitment by raising questions concerning the conduct of a presentence investigation of his case.
This court on many occasions has noted that we have no jurisdiction to entertain the petition here presented since no original jurisdiction to grant writs of habeas corpus has been placed in the Supreme Court. Lucianno v. Lane, Warden (1965), 246 Ind. 186, 204 N. E. 2d 220; State ex rel. Morvilius v. State (1960), 241 Ind. 199, 170 N. E. 2d 825; Rash v. Howard (1948), 226 Ind. 546, 82 N. E. 2d 88.
For the above reasons the petition for habeas corpus is dismissed.
Arterburn, C. J., Jackson, Landis & Myers, JJ., concur.
Note. — Reported in 207 N. E. 2d 215.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
207 N.E.2d 215, 246 Ind. 530, 1965 Ind. LEXIS 385, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/plunket-v-lane-ind-1965.