Legal Opinion

Ex Parte Ray

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided November 27, 1920No. A-3873PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMatson, J.

(after stating case as above). On the submission of this cause, counsel representing' petitioner waived the ground that petitioner was entitled to be discharged because he had served his sentence, irrespective of any pardon granted to him by the Governor of this state, and relied exclusively on the right to be discharged because of the benefits accruing to him by reason of a pardon granted to him by the Governor, above set forth.. In view of the fact, however, that many other convicted persons are confined in the state penitentiary under similar separate commitments for different offenses,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. United States v. WilsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1833
  2. Burdick v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
  3. Ex Parte CrumpCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1913
  4. Ex parte RenoSupreme Court of Missouri · 1877
  5. State v. NicholsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1870

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. In Re ShullCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Ex Parte YoustlerCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1928
  3. Ex Parte HalbertCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1929
  4. Adams v. WatersCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1951
  5. Ex Parte BellCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1926

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API