From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Conner v. Tinsley

Supreme Court of Colorado. En Banc
Sep 23, 1963
385 P.2d 259 (Colo. 1963)

Opinion

No. 20,787.

Decided September 23, 1963.

From denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus the petitioner brings error.

Writ of Error Dismissed.

1. HABEAS CORPUS — Appeal and Error — Record. Where record filed in Supreme Court does not contain petition for writ and no order of the trial court granting or denying the writ, the writ of error will be dismissed.

Error to the District Court of Weld County, Hon. Donald A. Carpenter, Judge.

Plaintiff in error, pro se.

Mr. DUKE W. DUNBAR, Attorney General, Mr. FRANK E. HICKEY, Deputy, Mr. JOHN E. BUSH, Assistant, for defendant in error.


PLAINTIFF in error sought a writ of habeas corpus in the trial court on the ground that he having been convicted of forgery was sentenced to the state penitentiary for not less than eight nor more that fifteen years whereas C.R.S. '53, 40-6-1 provides that the sentence which may be imposed is "* * * not less than one year nor more than fourteen years" in the Colorado State Penitentiary.

In the record filed with this court there is no petition for habeas corpus and no order of the court either granting or denying the writ. Instead there was filed a record on the original case entitled "People of the State of Colorado vs. Walter Conner" wherein certain proceedings were had to correct the sentence to provide for the maximum of fourteen years instead of fifteen years as contained in the original sentence.

There being no final judgment on the writ of habeas corpus and no record before this court to review, the writ of error is dismissed.


Summaries of

Conner v. Tinsley

Supreme Court of Colorado. En Banc
Sep 23, 1963
385 P.2d 259 (Colo. 1963)
Case details for

Conner v. Tinsley

Case Details

Full title:WALTER CONNER v. HARRY C. TINSLEY, WARDEN, ETC

Court:Supreme Court of Colorado. En Banc

Date published: Sep 23, 1963

Citations

385 P.2d 259 (Colo. 1963)
385 P.2d 259