In Re Application of Loundagin
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBean, J.
It is well settled that unless it is made to appear that the judgment, or process, under which the person seeking his discharge is absolutely void, no relief can be had under a writ of habeas corpus. If the process is valid on its face, it will be deemed prima facie efficient, and the prisoner must assume the burden of impeaching its validity by showing a want of jurisdiction. Errors, or irregularities, which render proceedings voidable merely, the court cannot reach, but only such defects, in substance, as render the process or judgment absolutely void: Ex parte Tice, 32 Or. 179, 182 (49…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Sandy White v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- State v. DunnOregon Supreme Court · 1909
- Ex parte TiceOregon Supreme Court · 1897
- Kelley v. MeyersOregon Supreme Court · 1928
- State v. HarveyOregon Supreme Court · 1926
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Huffman v. AlexanderOregon Supreme Court · 1952
- State Ex Rel. Juvenile Department v. ReynoldsOregon Supreme Court · 1993
- Smallman v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1955
- State v. LittleOregon Supreme Court · 1965
- Alcorn v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1964
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.