In re the Custody of Wright

Vaughn, J.

“ 'Except in cases involving the custody of minor children, G.S. 17-40 [repealed in 1967 but reprovided by G.S. 50-13.5 (b) (2) ], no appeal lies from a judgment rendered on return to a writ of habeas corpus. In re Steele, 220 N.C. 685, 687, 18 S.E. 2d 132, 134, and cases cited; in re Renfrow, supra [247 N.C. 55, 59, 100 S.E. 2d 315, 317]. The remedy, if any, is by petition for writ of certiorari, addressed to the sound discretion of the appellate court. In re Lee Croom, 175 N.C. 455, 95 S.E. 903.’ State v. Lewis, 274 N.C. 438, 441, 164 S.E. 2d 177. See also In re Palmer, 265 N.C. 485, 144 S.E. 2d 413; State v. Burnette, 173 N.C. 734, 739, 91 S.E. 364; In re Wilson, 3 N.C. App. 136, 164 S.E. 2d 56; State v. Green, 2 N.C. App. 391, 163 S.E. 2d 14; 2 McIntosh, N.C. Practice 2d, § 2464(9). The same rule applies to hearings on return to writs of habeas corpus in extradition proceedings. In re Malicord, 211 N.C. 684, 191 S.E. 730; In re Guerin, 206 N.C. 824, 175 S.E. 181; In re Bailey, 203 N.C. 362, 166 S.E. 165; In re Hubbard, 201 N.C. 472, 160 S.E. 569.” Texas v. Rhoades, 7 N.C. App. 388, 172 S.E. 2d 235.

Although this attempted appeal from a judgment rendered on a return to a writ of habeas corpus must be dismissed, we have considered the record and brief as a petition for writ of certiorari. The only error assigned was to the entry of the judgment. The record supports the judgment. Answer to the inquiries made by counsel in his brief and oral argument may, we believe, be found in numerous decisions of the Supreme Court. See State v. Propst, 274 N.C. 62, 161 S.E. 2d 560; Bell v. Smith, 263 N.C. 814, 140 S.E. 2d 542; State v. Sullivan, 229 N.C. 251, 49 S.E. 2d 458.

Appeal dismissed.

Petition denied.

Campbell and PARKER, JJ., concur.