Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

State Ex Rel. Girard v. Percich, 557 S.W.2d 25 (1977)

Citation
State Ex Rel. Girard v. Percich, 557 S.W.2d 25 (1977)
Parent Document
State Ex Rel. Girard v. Percich, 557 S.W.2d 25 (1977)
Jurisdiction
Missouri (state)
Effective Date
1977-08-30

Other Sections in This Document (114)

Full Text

880 chars
habeas court’s duty to review the evidence against each petitioner and determine “whether that evidence supports the finding, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the petitioner acted as stated in the specifications found as to him or her. In so doing it is unnecessary to consider all the specifications found as to that petitioner. The purpose of the writ is to test the legality of the restraint. It follows that if the determination stated above is supported as to even one of the several specifications contained in the judgment entered as to a petitioner, then that petitioner is not illegally restrained and, as to that individual, our writ should be quashed. On the other hand, if not even one of the several specifications found as to a petitioner is sustained, beyond a reasonable doubt, by the evidence then the petitioner must be discharged.” Curtis v. Tozer, supra at 581.