From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mitchem v. Balkcom

Supreme Court of Georgia
May 29, 1963
131 S.E.2d 562 (Ga. 1963)

Opinion

22021.

SUBMITTED MAY 13, 1963.

DECIDED MAY 29, 1963.

Habeas corpus. Reidsville City Court. Before Judge Carr.

Sam Johnson, Rene Kemp, for plaintiff in error.

Eugene Cook, Attorney General, Howard P. Wallace, Assistant Attorney General, B. Daniel Dubberly, Jr., Deputy Assistant Attorney General, contra.


In this State the common-law rule that the doctrine of res adjudicata does not extend to the trial of habeas corpus proceedings is not of force and such proceedings are subject to the provisions of Code § 110-501. See Andrews v. Aderhold, 201 Ga. 132 (2) ( 39 S.E.2d 61); and Wells v. Keith, 213 Ga. 858 ( 102 S.E.2d 533). The record in this case conclusively shows that the ground on which the applicant here relied for his release from the penitentiary was adjudicated adversely to him by a judgment rendered in a prior habeas corpus proceeding instituted by him against the respondent. This being, true, there is no merit in the contention that the court erred in sustaining the plea of res adjudicata and remanding him to respondent's custody.

Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur.

SUBMITTED MAY 13, 1963 — DECIDED MAY 29, 1963.


Summaries of

Mitchem v. Balkcom

Supreme Court of Georgia
May 29, 1963
131 S.E.2d 562 (Ga. 1963)
Case details for

Mitchem v. Balkcom

Case Details

Full title:MITCHEM v. BALKCOM, WARDEN

Court:Supreme Court of Georgia

Date published: May 29, 1963

Citations

131 S.E.2d 562 (Ga. 1963)
131 S.E.2d 562

Citing Cases

Spiller v. State

Walker v. Penn, 271 Ga. 609, 610 ( 523 SE2d 325) (1999).Mitchem v. Balkcom, 219 Ga. 47, 47 ( 131 SE2d 562)…

Ferguson v. Balkcom

It is an appropriate remedy only when the judgment or sentence under which applicant is being restrained is…