State ex rel. Irvine v. District Court of Fourth Judicial District

Montana Supreme Court

State ex rel. Irvine v. District Court of Fourth Judicial District

235 P.2d 662, 125 Mont. 247, 1951 Mont. LEXIS 122

Montana Supreme Court·Decided July 18, 1951·No. No. 9102·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Coram Nobis. The petitioner James Hugh Irvine, an inmate of the state prison having filed with the clerk of this court a petition representing that while an Indian ward of the United States government he was convicted in the district court of Lake county of having committed the crime of burglary alleged to have been committed in Indian country and challenging the jurisdiction of the said state district court in seeking release on jurisdictional grounds. It would appear that relator’s petition should have been filed in the office of the clerk of the district court of Lake county at Poison, Montana and by him called to the attention of the presiding judge thereof.

Now Therefore It Is Ordered that the petitioner Irvine and the Attorney General be informed by letter of such transfer. See State v. Hales, 124 Mont. 614, 230 Pac. (2d) 960; State v. Pepion (Tatsey), 125 Mont. 13, 230 Pac. (2d) 961.

It is so ordered.

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

PER CURIAM.

Coram Nobis. The petitioner James Hugh Irvine, an inmate of the state prison having filed with the clerk of this court a petition representing that while an Indian ward of the United States government he was convicted in the district court of Lake county of having committed the crime of burglary alleged to have been committed in Indian country and challenging the jurisdiction of the said state district court in seeking release on jurisdictional grounds. It would appear that relator’s petition should have been filed in the office of the clerk of the district court of Lake county at Poison, Montana and by him called to the attention of the presiding judge thereof.

Now Therefore It Is Ordered that the petitioner Irvine and the Attorney General be informed by letter of such transfer. See State v. Hales, 124 Mont. 614, 230 Pac. (2d) 960; State v. Pepion (Tatsey), 125 Mont. 13, 230 Pac. (2d) 961.

It is so ordered.

State ex rel. Irvine v. District Court of Fourth Judicial District, 235 P.2d 662, 125 Mont. 247, 1951 Mont. LEXIS 122 (Mo. 1951).

Pincite

235 P.2d 662 (State ex rel. Irvine v. District Court of Fourth Judicial District) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related