From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Daniels v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
Apr 12, 1991
809 P.2d 68 (Okla. Crim. App. 1991)

Summary

In Daniels v. State, 809 P.2d 68 (Okla.Crim. 1991), the court rejected an attempt to use mandamus relief to challenge sentence administration.

Summary of this case from Farris v. Patton

Opinion

No. O-91-136.

April 12, 1991.


ORDER DENYING WRIT OF MANDAMUS

The Petitioner has filed a petition for writ of mandamus with this Court challenging the administration of his sentence by the Respondents. Petitioner alleges that the application of 57 O.S.Supp. 1988 §§ 138[ 57-138] and 224 [ 57-224], and 57 O.S.Supp. 1989 § 138[ 57-138], is an improper imposition of ex post facto laws when applied to his case.

This Court has held that 57 O.S.Supp. 1988 §§ 138[ 57-138] and 224, and 57 O.S.Supp. 1989 § 138[ 57-138], are ex post facto laws as applied to prisoners whose crimes were committed prior to the effective date of the November 1, 1988, and November 1, 1989, amendments. Ekstrand v. State, 791 P.2d 92 (Okla. Cr. 1990). However, we have also held that a petition for writ of mandamus is not applicable to challenge the Department of Corrections' failure to grant credits to an inmate's sentence. Id., Mahler v. State, 783 P.2d 973 (Okla. Cr. 1989).

The proper procedure for seeking review of the administration of a sentence by the Department of Corrections is to file a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the district court of the county where the inmate is being restrained. Ekstrand, supra; Mahler, supra. "However, before any such writ can be granted, a petitioner must demonstrate that under the statute in effect on the date his or her crime was committed, he or she would have earned enough credits to be entitled to IMMEDIATE release." Ekstrand, supra. (emphasis in original).

IT IS THEREFORE THE ORDER OF THIS COURT that Petitioner's petition for writ of mandamus should be, and is hereby, DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ James F. Lane JAMES F. LANE, Presiding Judge

/s/ Gary L. Lumpkin GARY L. LUMPKIN, Vice Presiding Judge

/s/ Tom Brett TOM BRETT, Judge

/s/ Ed Parks ED PARKS, Judge

/s/ Charles A. Johnson CHARLES A. JOHNSON, Judge


Summaries of

Daniels v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
Apr 12, 1991
809 P.2d 68 (Okla. Crim. App. 1991)

In Daniels v. State, 809 P.2d 68 (Okla.Crim. 1991), the court rejected an attempt to use mandamus relief to challenge sentence administration.

Summary of this case from Farris v. Patton
Case details for

Daniels v. State

Case Details

Full title:DAVID DANIELS, PETITIONER, v. STATE OF OKLAHOMA, AND OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT…

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Date published: Apr 12, 1991

Citations

809 P.2d 68 (Okla. Crim. App. 1991)
1991 OK CR 46

Citing Cases

Farris v. Patton

Rather, Judge Erwin relied on Petitioner's affirmative statements that he had not presented his claims to…