Court Opinion

ID: 9688878
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 18:10:26.958968+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:06:57.908022
License: Public Domain

Gillespie, J.,
dissenting:
I concur in the able dissenting opinion of Justice Rodgers.
So that we may see clearly the new course charted by the majority, it should be pointed out that the habeas corpus proceeding in this case amounted to nothing less than a review by one trial judge of the acts of another trial judge in a discretionary procedural matter, where the habeas corpus judge reversed the first trial judge. If the order involved had been void on its face, the majority would be on firmer ground, but the habeas corpus judge weighed the evidence on which the other judge acted, and found it wanting. None of our cases cited by the majority involve this kind of review under the guise of habeas corpus.