(Syllabus.)

Habeas Corpus-Writ May not Be Used as Substitute for Appeal and Will not Be Issued Unless Judgment and Sentence Attacked Is Clearly Void. This court on habeas corpus will not look beyond the judgment and sentence of any court of competent jurisdiction as to mere irregularities of procedure or errors in law on questions over which the court had jurisdiction. The writ of habeas corpus cannot be used to perform the office of a writ of error on appeal, and should be limited to cases in which the judgment and sentence of the court attacked is clearly void.

Original habeas corpus proceedings by C. E. Owens to secure release from state penitentiary. Writ denied.

C. E. Owens, in pro. per.

Mac Q. Williamson, Atty., Gen., for respondent.

BAREFOOT, P. J. Petitioner, C. E. Owens, has filed a petition in this court for a writ of habeas corpus. The facts in this case are almost identical with the facts

Page 400

as set forth in the case of In re Pat Wright, 75 Okla. Cr. 367, 131 P.2d 773. Petitioner was charged in the district court of Oklahoma county with larceny by fraud of an automobile; entered a plea of guilty and was by the court sentenced to serve a term of three years in the penitentiary.

There is nothing in the petition which reveals that the court did not have jurisdiction or that the judgment and sentence is void.

For the same reasons stated in the case of In re Pat Wright, the writ of habeas corpus is denied.

JONES, J., concurs. DOYLE, J., absent.