Mississippi Code
Miss. Code Ann. § 11-43-7 (2026)
By whom granted
✓ current as of July 2026
The writ of habeas corpus may be granted by a judge of the Supreme Court, or a judge of the circuit or chancery court, in term time or in vacation, returnable before himself or another judge.
Codes, Hutchinson's 1848, ch. 65, art. 1 (1); 1857, ch. 48, art. 1; 1871, § 1398; 1880, § 2521; 1892, § 2229; 1906, § 2448; Hemingway's 1917, § 2014; 1930, § 1917; 1942, § 2818.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases, 1980–2015 · leading case: Beckwith v. State, 615 So. 2d 1134 (Miss. 1992).
Beckwith v. State, 615 So. 2d 1134 (Miss. 1992). “1992); or, alternatively, his pleading is sufficiently specific to treat it as an application to this Court for a writ of habeas corpus, Miss. Code Ann. §§ 11-43-7 , 11-43-9 (Supp.”
Bell v. Watkins, 381 So. 2d 118 (Miss. 1980). “titioner, pursuant to the provisions of Section 99-35-145 of the Mississippi Code of 1972, as amended; (b) This Court has the power to grant the writ of habeas corpus for which prayer is hereinafter made, and, in accordance therewith, to grant the further relief for which prayer…”
Bubac v. Boston, 600 So. 2d 951 (Miss. 1992). “Miss. Code Ann. § 11-43-7 (1972). "When an application in habeas corpus has been made to a county judge, or has been made returnable before him, he acts not as a county court [judge], but with all the power and authority of a circuit judge or chancellor; wherefore, an appeal…”
Pritchett v. Pritchett ex rel. in the Interest of Pritchett, 161 So. 3d 1106 (Miss. Ct. App. 2015). “2014) and Mississippi Code Annotated section 11-43-7 (Rev.2012) provide chancery courts the authority to grant such writs as habeas corpus.”
Rochester Eugene Presley v. State of Mississippi, 176 So. 3d 158 (Miss. Ct. App. 2015). “Presley argues that since he filed his motion under Mississippi Code Annotated section 11-43-7 (Rev.2012), and not Mississippi Code Annotated section 99-39-5 (Supp.”
Sizemore v. Pickett, 76 So. 3d 788 (Miss. Ct. App. 2011). “Mississippi Code Annotated section 11-43-11 provides, if from the showing made by the petition for habeas cotpus, it manifestly appears the person presenting it is not entitled to any relief thereby, the chancellor may refuse to grant the writ.”
Cressionnie v. Kelly, 174 F. App'x 246 (5th Cir. 2006). “See Miss.Code Ann. § 11-43-7; Bubac v. Boston, 600 So.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.