Opinion ID: 1549904
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Law Court #975 Post-Conviction Habeas Corpus

Text: On March 7, 1969 the petitioner moved the Court to allow the Petition enclosed, and titled `Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus,' to be entered and that such amended petition be considered as the only Petition before the Court, and the Petition of said January 20, 1969 be stricken. The motion was verified by the petitioner. The amended petition, however, was not verified. The motion to amend was granted by the Court. Verification of the motion to amend by allowance of an enclosed petition is not the equivalent of a verification of the Amendment. The jurisdictional requirement of verification under 14 M.R.S.A. § 5503 was therefore lacking and the Court below for this reason had no jurisdiction to entertain the amended petition. Holbrook v. State, 161 Me. 102, 208 A.2d 313. Further, the verification is no more than Subscribed and Sworn to    Before Me    Notary Public. This does not meet the language of 14 M.R.S.A. § 5503. Facts within the personal knowledge of the petitioner and the authenticity of all documents and exhibits included in or attached to the petition must be sworn to affirmatively as true and correct. See also M.R.Crim.P. Rule 35(b) (3): Form 26, 3 Maine Pract. Rules (Glassman). The sitting Justice dismissed the petition on its merits under Hartley. We sustain the dismissal for lack of jurisdiction. The entry in #975 will be: Appeal denied. MARDEN, and WEATHERBEE, JJ., did not sit.