Ex Parte James Earl Cannon

Summary

The Court held that the indictment for burglary was fundamentally defective because it failed to allege the requisite intent to commit a felony or theft, rendering the conviction void and granting the petitioner's habeas corpus relief. Two dissenting judges argued the indictment sufficiently alleged theft intent and that the petitioner's waiver barred relief, while a concurring judge affirmed the majority's jurisdictional analysis.