CHANROBLES VIRTUAL LAW LIBRARY
US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for www.chanrobles.com


IN RE SNOW, 120 U. S. 274 (1887)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 120 U. S. 274 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

In re Snow, 120 U.S. 274 (1887)

In re Snow

Argued January 21, 1887

Decided February 7, 1887.

120 U.S. 274

Syllabus

Where a district court in the Territory of Utah refuses to issue a writ of habeas corpus involving the question of personal freedom, an appeal lies to this Court from its order and judgment of refusal.

The offense of cohabiting with more than one woman, created by § 3 of the Act of Congress of March 22, 1852, c. 47, 22 Stat. 31, is a continuous offense, and not one consisting of an isolated act. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 120 U. S. 275

S. was convicted separately in a district court of the Territory of Utah, on three indictments under that section, covering together a continuous period of time, each covering a different part, but the three parts being continuous, the indictments being found at the same time, by the same grand jury, on one oath and one examination of the same witnesses, covering the whole continuous time. One judgment was entered on the three convictions. It first imposed a term of imprisonment and a fine. It next imposed two further successive terms of imprisonment, each to begin at the expiration of the last preceding sentence and judgment, with two further fines. It set forth the time embraced by each indictment and specified each of the three punishments as being imposed in respect of a specified one of the indictments. On a petition to the district court of the territory by the defendant for a writ of habeas corpus, setting forth that he had been imprisoned under the judgment for more than the term first imposed and had paid the fine first imposed, and that the other two punishments were in excess of the authority of the trial court, the writ was refused. On appeal to this Court,

Held:

(1) There was but one entire offense for the continuous time.

(2) The trial court had no jurisdiction to inflict a punishment in respect of more than one of the convictions.

(3) As the want of jurisdiction appeared on the face of the proceedings, the defendant could be released from imprisonment on a habeas corpus.

(4) The order and judgment of the court below must be reversed and the case be remanded to that court with a direction to grant the writ of habeas corpus prayed for.

This was an appeal from an order of court refusing an application for a writ of habeas corpus. The case is stated in the opinion of the Court.





Back
ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for chanrobles.com Search for www.chanrobles.com


Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



www.chanrobles.us




QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

Browse By ->> Volume


cralaw

Browse By ->> Year


cralaw

  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
 
RED