In the Matter of the Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus of EMMET JONES, Petitioner, v. JOHN R. CRANOR, as Warden of the State Penitentiary, Respondent.«1»
Application filed in the supreme court October 5, 1949, for a writ of habeas corpus. Denied.
Emmet Jones, pro se.
The Attorney General and John Blankinship, Assistant, for respondent.
PER CURIAM. -
The petitioner was sentenced to a term in the penitentiary upon a charge of grand larceny. His application for this writ is based upon the contention that his sentence was predicated upon a plea of guilty to an information which only charged the issuance of a check, the penalty for which should have been punishment as for a misdemeanor. The record discloses that he was charged with wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously by color and aid of a check securing from the Marcus Whitman Garage the sum of forty dollars at a time when he did not have sufficient funds in the bank to pay it.
The question presented has been decided by this court in the recent case of In re Moon v. Cranor, ante p. 230, 212 P. (2d) 775. In that case we held that the issuance of a check without sufficient funds in the bank to pay it, amounted to grand larceny where the information charged that more than twenty-five dollars was secured by the maker of the check.
Based upon the holding in the cited case, we deny the writ.
«1»Reported in 212 P. (2d) 776.
In the Matter of the Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus of
CHRISTOPHER GEORGE CAMPBELL, Petitioner, v. JOHN R. CRANOR,
as Warden of the State Penitentiary, Respondent.«1»
Application filed in the supreme court November 3, 1949, for a writ of habeas corpus. Granted.
Christopher George Campbell, pro se.
The Attorney General and John Blankinship, Assistant, for respondent.
PER CURIAM. -
The petitioner, an inmate of the Washington state penitentiary, applied for a writ of habeas corpus. He based his claim of right to the writ upon the fact that he was sentenced to serve a term of not more than fifteen years in the reformatory at Monroe, upon his plea of
«1»Reported in 212 P. (2d) 1019.
Jan. 1950] HOTES v. HOTES. 939
guilty to a charge of issuing a check on a bank, knowing that he did not have sufficient funds therein for its payment. We are not advised concerning the reason for his imprisonment in the state penitentiary, but presume that he was transferred there by the board of prison terms and paroles.
The record discloses that the claim of petitioner relative to the charge and sentence is true, and, further, that the information did not charge him with having obtained money or other consideration because of the issuance of the check. The conclusion reached by this court in the cases of In re Sorenson v. Smith, 34 Wn. (2d) 659, 209 P. (2d) 479, and In re Jeane v. Smith, 34 Wn. (2d) 826, 210 P. (2d) 127, governs the disposition of the case at bar. In those cases, as here, the charge was based upon Rem. Rev. Stat., § 2601-2 [P.P.C. § 116-41], which provides the penalty as for a gross misdemeanor.
We hold that the sentence to the reformatory was void, and instruct that the petitioner be returned to the superior court for Chelan county, there to be dealt with as provided by law.