The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1936-02-20
FATE OF STEVE
AGAIN IN HANDS
OF HIGH COURT
Worden Asks Dissolution of
Writ Barring Him From
Hearing Plea.

The fate of D. C. Stephenson, one
time grand dragon of the Ku-Klux
Khan, again is in the hands Of the
Indiana Supreme Court.
Contending the state failed to
make a proper return to Stephen
sons petition for writ of habeas
corpus to gain release from the In
diana State Prison, attorneys for
Judge Writ Worden, of La Porte
Circuit Court yesterday argued for
dissolution of temporary writ of
prohibition issued by the high court
to prevent Judge Wcrden from
hearing the habeas corpus petition.
With Chief Justice Curtis Roll
presiding, all five members of the
Supreme Court heard the latest
move by which the former Khan
leader hopes to gain his freedom.
Claim Error by Lutz
Stephenson was sentenced to
life term for the murder of an In
dianapolis young woman after his
conviction in Hamilton Circuit
Court Nov. IA. 1925.
Judge Worden and Clarence V.
Shields, one of his attorneys, argued
the La Porte court has the right to
inquire into the constitutionality of
all the processes by which Stephen
son was convicted. The writ of pro-
hibition attacks the statutory au-
thority of the La Porte court, they
argued, which gives the court power
over subject matter and persons in
cases arising in La Porte County,
in which the state prison is sit
uated.
Atty. Gen. Philip Lutz Jr., and his
deputy, Edward BARGE, erred, Judge
Worden contended, by failing to in
clude in their answer to the habeaS
corpus petition certification of
Stephenson's conviction and COM
mitment by the Hamilton court.
Worden Resents State Brief
In steps leading to the hearing
yesterday. Mr. Lutz had filed mo-
ton to quash the habeas corpus
petition, which was overruled. The
attorney general next filed a mo-
ton for change of judge and while
that motion was pending obtained
the temporary writ of prohibition
from the high court. Judge Worden
expressed resentment at the
language used in the state brief
supporting the motion to quash.
Mr.. Shields, in defending what he
termed the statutory jurisdiction of
the La Porte court to hear habeas
corpus petitions, asked the rhetori-
cal question of the high court:
II submit the question, does a
different rule prevail for D. c.
Stephenson"
Both Mr.. Lutz and Mr.. BARGE, as
sisted by Thomas O'Meara, special
state counsel, argued that the La
Porte court can not inquire into and
review the acts of the Hamilton
court, tribunal of equal jurisdic-
ton.
Hold Remedy Is in Appeal
The Hamilton court conviction
oAlA CO1il4il1OlllCilU VI oUSPll6IlSO1l
was set forth in the latter's petition
for habeas corpus writ, state
counsel pointed out, and therefore
constituted bar to the La Porte
court assuming jurisdiction.
State counsel offered numerous
citations of cases in which the
habeas corpus writ has been used
similarly and in which the higher
courts have held prisoners rem
edy lay in appeal, if the face of
the Judgment and commitment
were regular.
The members of the Supreme
Court interrupted counsel for both
sides frequently, asking counsel's at
titudes assuming "such and such"
set of circumstances were conceded
to be fact.
Decision in the case, the third at
tempt of Stephenson to gain his
freedom, is not expected before next
week. He already has lost on appeal
and writ or error coram nobis &C
tons before the high court.