Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

48 Okla. Crim. 205

290 P 568

Ex Parte Lyons

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · decided 1930-08-02

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently January 1973

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1930-08-02

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1 This is an original proceeding in habeas corpus in which petitioner alleges that she is incarcerated in the city jail of Tulsa charged with the violation of “Ordinance number-of the city of Tulsa.” It is then alleged that the ordinance is void for numerous reasons. The application was filed on June 6, and a hearing had. The petition for writ does not have attached to it a copy of the ordinance, and no proof of it was made under the provisions of section 645, Comp. St. 1921, nor does the petition disclose the number of the ordinance nor the date of its adoption. Counsel for petitioner was given ten days to file brief, and, when not filed during that time, a further extension of ten days was allowed. No briefs have been filed. The petition will be considered as abandoned.

¶2 The case is dismissed.

/48/oklacrim/205 · .json · Public domain