Summary
requiring petitions for post-conviction relief to be filed in the court of conviction, and if a petitioner erroneously files a habeas corpus petition challenging the validity of his or her conviction or sentence in the county of incarceration, the court will treat it as a petition for post-conviction relief and must transfer it to the court of conviction
Summary of this case from Willet v. StateOpinion
No. 28,492.
Filed October 27, 1948.
1. HABEAS CORPUS — Jurisdiction of Parties — Court Where Party is Restrained Has Exclusive Jurisdiction. — While the statute reads that writs of habeas corpus "may" be granted by the Circuit or Superior Courts of the county in which the person applying may be restrained of his liberty, it has been held in effect that such courts have exclusive jurisdiction in such proceedings. Burns' Stat., § 3-1905. p. 438.
2. HABEAS CORPUS — Jurisdiction of Parties — Party Convicted in One County and Restrained in Another — Jurisdiction in County Where Restrained. — Where a party was convicted in Steuben County and confined in state prison in LaPorte County, jurisdiction to entertain petition for writ of habeas corpus was in Circuit or Superior Court of LaPorte County and not Steuben County, since his liberty was restrained in LaPorte County. Burns' Stat., § 3-1905. p. 438.
Original action by the State of Indiana on the relation of Fred Moore, relator, for a writ of mandamus to require Clyde Carlin, Judge, Steuben Circuit Court, respondent, to act upon a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed in respondent's court.
Petition for mandate denied.
Fred M. Moore, pro se.
Relator asks that we mandate the Judge of the Steuben Circuit Court to act upon a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed by relator in that court.
A copy of the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is attached to the petition in this court and it appears that Ralph Howard, as Warden of the Indiana State Prison, is the sole defendant. It further appears that relator is confined in the Indiana State Prison at Michigan City, LaPorte County, Indiana, serving a sentence of two to five years pursuant to judgment of the Steuben Circuit Court.
He alleges that the Judge of the Steuben Circuit Court has failed to hear or set for hearing his petition for a writ of habeas corpus and will continue to refuse to do so 1, 2. unless mandated by this court. Relator being restrained of his liberty in LaPorte County, Indiana, and not in Steuben County, jurisdiction to entertain a petition for a writ of habeas corpus is in the Circuit or Superior Court of LaPorte County, Indiana. § 3-1905, Burns' 1946 Replacement. While that statute reads that writs of habeas corpus may be granted by the Circuit or Superior Courts of the county in which the person applying therefor may be restrained of his or her liberty it has been held in effect that such actions must be brought in the courts named, and that such courts have exclusive jurisdiction in such proceedings. Newsom v. Miles (1942), 220 Ind. 427, 428, 44 N.E.2d 297; State ex rel. Bevington v. Myers, Judge (1942), 220 Ind. 149, 150, 41 N.E.2d 358; Murphy v. Daly (1934), 206 Ind. 179, 188 N.E. 769; State ex rel. Howard v. Hamilton Circuit Court (1946), 224 Ind. 220, 222, 66 N.E.2d 62.
It follows that the Steuben Circuit Court is without jurisdiction in the habeas corpus proceeding instituted there by the relator and that being true we should not mandate it to take action therein.
Petition for mandate denied.
NOTE. — Reported in 81 N.E.2d 670.