Court Opinion

ID: 5149660
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-02 01:50:35.399436+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:24:58.584237
License: Public Domain

[1] This is an appeal from the denial of post conviction relief in the District Court of Canadian County, Case No. CR-69-484, wherein the trial court, after reviewing the records, made findings of fact and conclusions of law, which findings of fact and conclusions of law are supported by the record and adopted by this Court and appended hereto.
[2] For the reasons therein stated, the trial court's denial of post conviction relief is affirmed, and Petitioner is advised that he has now exhausted all of his state remedies.
[3] SIMMS and BRETT, JJ., concur.
 APPENDIX
 IN THE DISTRICT COURT WITHIN AND FOR CANADIAN COUNTY
 STATE OF OKLAHOMA
 THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA,
 Plaintiff,
 -vs-
 NO. CR-69-484
 JESSE DAVID HENSLEY,
 Defendant.
 POST-CONVICTION ORDER
 On November 3, 1969, an Information charging the defendant with
Manslaughter in the First Degree, Counts 1 and 2, was filed, Case
No. Cr-69-484. Both Counts were based on the alleged misconduct
of the defendant while driving his automobile and failing to keep
to the right side of the highway resulting in an automobile
collision which brought about the death of two women. The
defendant was represented by counsel and a preliminary hearing
was held on both Counts which resulted in the defendant being
bound over for trial.
 *Page 441 
 On March 22, 1970, the Information was further amended to show
the charge on both Counts of being Manslaughter in the Second
Degree, and the defendant entered a plea of guilty to both cases
and received a four year suspended sentence on each count with
the further order that they were to run concurrently. The
defendant was represented by his attorney, Jess Horn, who was
present and represented the defendant at the time of the Judgment
and Sentence.
 On February 8, 1971, the District Attorney filed an application
to revoke the suspended sentence in said case for the reason that
the defendant had plead guilty to the crime of driving while
under the influence of intoxicating liquor, driving while under
suspension, and transporting an opened container of liquor, in
the District Court of Canadian County, Oklahoma, in Case Nos.
CRT-71-436, CRT-71-437 and CRT-71-438.
 A hearing on said application to revoke suspended sentence was
held on February 11, 1971, and at the conclusion of said hearing,
the Court revoked the suspended sentences and the defendant was
sentenced to serve the two terms in the State Penitentiary.
 On July 28, 1971, the defendant filed a petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus. Although said Writ is not a proper form for
Post-Conviction Relief, the Writ does mention the Post-Conviction
Procedure Act and for the purpose of this opinion will be
considered as a Post-Conviction Appeal. On August 6, 1971, the
State, by and through the Assistant District Attorney, John C.
Howard, filed a motion for Summary Judgment with authority.
Defendant's petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus sets forth one
ground, which is that prosecuting him on two counts of Second
Degree Manslaughter results in double prosecution and double
punishment for a single act, i.e. one car collision. It seems
that his argument is that there was only one act and he should
suffer but one conviction and that any conviction for other
crimes constitutes double jeopardy.
 The controversy in this case contains no factual issue,
therefore, neither an evidentiary hearing nor testimony of any
person would be material.
 The question presented in defendant's argument is controlled by
Bass v. State, Okla. Cr. 489 P.2d 1343 (1971), wherein the Court
of Criminal Appeals held: "A plea of double jeopardy is abandoned
by subsequent entry of a plea of guilty which is knowingly and
intelligently entered, with full knowledge of the nature and
consequences of such plea, while the defendant is represented by
counsel."
 THEREFORE, it is Ordered by this Court that the defendant is
not entitled to the relief prayed for in his petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus and said petition is hereby dismissed. The
defendant is notified that this is a final judgment and may be
appealed to the Court of Criminal Appeals on a Petition-in-Error
within thirty (30) days from the entry of this judgment.
 Dated this 12th day of November, 1971.
  (s) Fenton R. Ramey 
 FENTON R. RAMEY
 DISTRICT JUDGE