Legal Opinion

Ex parte Brunding

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided January 15, 1871PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Petition for Habeas Corpus. I. The prisoner should be discharged from his imprisonment. The full term of his imprisonment has expired. II. The trial, conviction and sentence, under which the third warrant issued, were illegal, and said warrant void, the prisoner at the time of such trial being under sentence for felony. (Ex parte Meyers, 44 Mo. 279; Ex parte Turner, 45 Mo. 331; Wagn. Stat. 513.)

1Opinion of the CourtWagner, Judge

The petitioner asks to be discharged from the custody of the warden of the penitentiary on the ground that the time for which he was lawfully imprisoned has expired.

The facts are these: In 1864 he was indicted for two separate offenses in the St. Louis Criminal Court, and convicted and sentenced to two years’ imprisonment in the penitentiary for each offense. Before the expiration of the term of his imprisonment he unlawfully made his escape; and while so absent and running at large he committed the offense of grand larceny, was indicted, *256convicted, sentenced, and again returned to the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Ex parte MeyersSupreme Court of Missouri · 1869
  2. Ex parte TurnerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1870

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. ConnellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1872
  2. State Ex Rel. Meininger v. BreuerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1924
  3. Ex parte DurbinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1890
  4. Brokaw v. McDougallSupreme Court of Florida · 1883
  5. In re SargoodSupreme Court of Vermont · 1912

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

Powered by the Exa API