Veal v. Peterson
This text of 2004 OK 91 (Veal v. Peterson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
ORDER
The petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus, to question the legality of his confinement in a federal penitentiary is denied for want of jurisdiction. The power to entertain a writ of habeas corpus is dependent on jurisdiction over the custodian, in this case the warden of the federal penitentiary in El Reno, Oklahoma. Brittingham v. U.S., 982 F.2d 378 (9th Cir.1992). Federal officials acting in their official capacities are not answerable to this Court. Beeman v. Olson, 828 F.2d 620 (9th Cir.1987).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2004 OK 91, 104 P.3d 584, 2004 Okla. LEXIS 98, 2004 WL 2749819, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/veal-v-peterson-okla-2004.