Wright v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Wright v. State

1964 OK CR 41, 390 P.2d 921, 1964 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 167

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

DecidedApril 1, 1964

DocketNo. A-13472

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 1964 OK CR 41 (Wright v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wright v. State, 1964 OK CR 41, 390 P.2d 921, 1964 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 167 (Okla. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

NIX, Judge.

This is an attempt by the petitioner, Al-vie Wright, to file a petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, seeking his release from the State Penitentiary at McAlester, Oklahoma.

It will be unnecessary to set out the allegations in the petition, as it does not meet the requirements necessary to invoke jurisdiction on this Court. We have ncid' .repeatedly, as in the case of In re r Salisbury, Okl.Cr., 363 P.2d 380 :

“Where inmate of penitentiary wishes to challenge judgment and sentence pronounced against him, he should attach to his petition for writ of habeas corpus a certified copy of the information, and a certified copy of such judgment and sentence.”

No such documents were filed in connection with this case.

Where petition for habeas corpus-is filed, the burden is upon the petitioner to prove grounds upon which he relies for his release, and the unsupported statements of a petitioner do not meet the requirements of the proof. Huggins v. Raines, Okl.Cr., 372 P.2d 248.

Accordingly, the petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is Denied.

JOHNSON, P. J., and BUSSEY, J.r concur.

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