In re Howell
Supreme Court of Missouri
Habeas Corpus. (1) In habeas corpus, when the petitioners seek release from punishment for an alleged criminal contempt, this court will go behind the return, commitment and judgment, and ascertain the facts, and determine whether or not the facts warrant the judgment.' Ex parte Creasy, 243 Mo. 679; Ex parte O’Brien, 127 Mo. 477. (2) Direct criminal contempt of court is defined to be “disorderly or insolent behavior committed during the session and in the immediate view and…
Read the full summary
Habeas Corpus. (1) In habeas corpus, when the petitioners seek release from punishment for an alleged criminal contempt, this court will go behind the return, commitment and judgment, and ascertain the facts, and determine whether or not the facts warrant the judgment.' Ex parte Creasy, 243 Mo. 679; Ex parte O’Brien, 127 Mo. 477. (2) Direct criminal contempt of court is defined to be “disorderly or insolent behavior committed during the session and in the immediate view and presence of the'Court, directly tending to interrupt its proceedings or impair respect due its authority . . . or wilful…
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, P. J.
Relief by habeas corpus is invoked by petitioners in this court to effect their discharge from an alleged unauthorized judgment of commitment for contempt rendered against them by the judge of the circuit court of Cole County.
The writ was granted as prayed and made returnable on a day certain. The sheriff of Cole County, who held petitioners in custody, made return to the writ, to which petitioners filed their reply. The facts as set out in the judgment of commitment with which the return is in accord, having been put in issue by the reply of petitioners, the court appointed Yirgil Y. Huff,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Counselman v. HitchcockSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- People Ex Rel. Tweed v. . LiscombNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Ex Parte FISKSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- State ex inf. Crow v. ShepherdSupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
- In re ClarkSupreme Court of Missouri · 1907
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- Teefey v. TeefeySupreme Court of Missouri · 1976
- Curtis v. TozerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1964
- State v. JonesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1924
- State ex rel. McAllister v. SlateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1919
- State Ex Inf. McKittrick v. KoonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1947
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.