Opinion
Civil No. 4315.
Filed October 22, 1940.
HABEAS CORPUS. — A prisoner was not entitled to discharge on writ of habeas corpus on ground that imprisonment was unlawful, where return of superintendent of state prison showed that prisoner was held by virtue of a judgment and sentence for the crime of perjury duly entered in the superior court and a commitment duly issued thereon on certain date.
See 13 Cal. Jur. 280; 25 Am. Jur. 250; 12 R.C.L. 1252.
Original proceeding for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Writ quashed.
Mr. Robert R. Weaver, for Petitioner.
Mr. Joe Conway, Attorney General and Mr. Albert M. Garcia, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.
The petitioner here is the same person as the defendant-appellant in Criminal Cause No. 895, entitled: Pearl Pray, Appellant, v. State of Arizona, Respondent, ante, p. 171, 106 P.2d 500. She seeks to be discharged from the state prison where she is confined, claiming such imprisonment is unlawful.
The return of the superintendent of the prison to the writ of habeas corpus issued out of this court shows that she is held by him under and by virtue of a judgment and sentence for the crime of perjury duly rendered and entered in the Superior Court of Maricopa County, Arizona, and a commitment duly issued thereon dated April 22, 1940.
For the reasons given in the opinion in Cause No. 895, supra, for not reversing the judgment and sentence therein, petitioner is not entitled to her discharge on writ of habeas corpus. Accordingly, the writ is quashed.
LOCKWOOD and McALISTER, JJ., concur.