About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

18 Pitt. Legal J. 1 (1870-1871)

handle is hein.statereports/pittlegj0018 and id is 1 raw text is: 0~ 1 ii~ ,1 1. ~'ITUG , ?W' -DEP DY AGUST 8.1, 187Qh.0011 .4-V'Y.. 4~~. .. Q..... . I. I - 1-' .A .4 0 bi 0 'BUPAXE; COURT,O . Usoder tb9 crOnoio poodoors ~t B5,t 81 n u of .urdr634 'uitiry wioi .htlr,'s writ o --..n~r w. illlS tliO581 I1bloll tihitydrs oIi and & pIll41111 s or, obtIsid '8es tie a pIlep ,Oo e ud,O! $Hourd,;sPii O i.o SJudgos tbhr., sod f 41 othell r e 1. . Id .0ilnol I thle Oolull or Qosr slloosi or Oye, sod 'ro, cnlae.', 'by toolisot or~oii, ' Al aiie Ossnes0' 10fl... twowril5JolOls.ioeqi e t4 t.y, oa ' ub . i-i . or* i C i3 ig. Il * I,.:oa dju d C i ortirW fo r alt th os for the the wur wolid bly before tIei poy tlb , 950o hqs tb 4 Slfrsdy tos d upon. ) eolob *' oIM lbstorlid lth cfaeri .i 00oqr cha 1570, a fdor the o.11I NMert Onvs atr: to grhe sucs i a 1 i' t Ut : ' r.-Wl eh ih 30y7ourl hilol o50Oyw o.irli I p .,6Ita. . Io .t . t Allt / iJ '', Il: b I'd >I' . > rto urt or Iyer and Tar. Snor' of merd co unt y. 1, , ,Oplnion ,y'A W1it..W tDvred 'AI Upon the trial ofl alifjiUdlcitmn't, for 'murder or ,folutinlary manslaughter,.the defondati.nmay,, under, theact, of 81s( Mareloh,.880,.except to ny decision ipf tile court upon , point og eyidence, or of Jaw.,' He may.also'requiro the court to Slive..o it. D)lit lon; .1)o. any point sub- raitted In writing, to reduce the answer to writing, aill file it, lnd the point of record. The sot than allows a writ of e orror, but provioe that, no such writ shall be allowed, unless special applica- tion be made therefor, and canse shown withlin thirty days after senteuce Is pro- .noulced, to the Supreme Court, If sit- tilg in bi.nc, or. to a Jlige In vcaetion. This is a wiso, and salutary~provlsion to guard the interests of the public againstunfounded writs of erroi, and all the consequouces' 'of dilatory 'punlsh- 'monti and, at the'iiamo time, to proict the dofaudantagalnst uoilist cbniviction. :*Tioe 'vrlt ni ut; therefore', b' specially .'alo~,wei and if'the. deflnddtiit ftll' to make loIl apiplcatli'WVthfln thirtydulys, • oi 'if tho&enus&'thl4~'n blnlsoflieiend, thii CKi8e11 it; a'IPoo, oI A the Pet Of 18(10, the billsof 'exeoption 'fall, and the JuIdghbent, stands for exedutlon:U i) Writ of 'error was mado 'wJthin 'thlrty ,-d4ys 'Othlf ustlco Them ,psoriwho, At , cnren'ieibe w'th T edlahnd Shiars- wood J.. (they eotolrrIng'wlt4' him,) foudAR'n6l sui16izif I cabW toa I 'allow tie writ of error, and It was; therefore, re- Lutsi. Thq prisondrTs , c6dsol then ap- plied- t6 the Aftbi ney-Geheral 'for his I 'conssolnt to a wt'it'bf errorl tinder the 03d ', eetlon bf'the aibl:bf 18(0.! -)lis seitilon pliWs t writ of 'erro lInal: cases of r'iiodlctmeiip I ti' Co'ur tlbf 'Quarter P, 'Senion'9 in'd'. yer' and Toriidner and 'J'dobA' not( embraee the cisei bf' murder Sadid vO1uitary'Yoanslaughter,speioliy ,'1rlldd l. i Whlo,7th, 8th and 60th , l elon of tfib' I nirm t; 'cotfining tie ii'owaiob6%f the0 A' rlt' t!'the Supreme I , su bef6re stae'd.'The actof 1880 i d iovislotiof' ahl tile dfilrnial laws 'of theI'Sttabye;.~'8qrned com i sifull healded' bhythat eliterot 'arimlnal lawl ,ier', Judge King.: Itcan not bupased theyl Intended tlie several' parits of 'thd tdit 'to conflict witi each ithei. '1h-i lilmititlott to thirty ' days,' d :: W iuka~lshown to the court lt bane, or oii of it Judgei, Is. inoonlputible with'the Issulng ofa writ of error upon the here consent of thil Attorney-General, at any time- afterward. ' Toe Attorney-Gea. erl,' however, from motIves of itoman- lty;/ and, tho point toot having 'efori arlson in'pratice, gave his conser.,, and lile wrlt of error was issued and 'heard befod us, at Phlodelphla. Butthe de'- fendant having failed tobringtp ItIs Illsl ofexceptions o uder the50thl sect ionofthe act of 1860, it became evideot that this writ of error then before us hrugtst up nothtink but the clomon law recordIIn 'wich it was not; pretended there 'was atoy error.' The Judgment of theoCourt of Oyer:and Ternlter'was, of course, afirtmed. Thus tlis case pooloeod into final judgment; for tho aflhruance be ltg by' the highest court in the State there could be no writ of error' to It 'li Judgment being rendered, the re cord woos re'nltted to the court below, oAn the 14th day of February, 1870. On tie 15th, of February, 1870;'a' ha' was passed allowing writs of error In cease pf murder and volttntry titn slaiuglter, as a miatter of' right, withou a special aplicatlon unoler tbe act o 1860. Tieoo70ss ofPoul Sclooeppeloavii been decided before the passage of lIt at, be has oblaintad a second'writ o error from tito Prottootary, elahinno It as a nmtter of right nder tho litt act, atil thIs writ Is tow before us. ''h Conmonweolth, relying oi tho Judg ment of atilrnatte utder the forme writ, has leitded thoat judgment in ba of this writ. Tile ot of 1870 apllie only to futuro writs of error, and tloe pndihlg it this court when th law Wis pa[ssedl. Fihal Judgmlent htav Ing bsen rendored, and thie record rs olied otii the l4ti of Febrlory, tle cas was not pendling before us on tlie 16th when the law wits passed. Tile plea I bariotust ,tirefore,)rovail. 'loedoefetd 'anlt's cuosel perceivilng this utiavolo able result, hall moved us to open th Julgment of otfirnice, given Io th former writ of error, In thot hope tho we olmly, otn opelig It, treat the 0as0 a writ pending tit tile paosage of the lan Intendilg then to apply to It the prt vislons of the at of 1870. 'r This motlto it also before us, anod involves two quo tioe, one Upon tile power 'of tioe cou to open the former Judgmnent after th boron had explied, ant the otlher upo the applicability 'f the act of 1870 to ti case, If the Julgnoent should be oponed It Is not necessary to decide the quo tian oflpower,butit isopposod bysutho tty, and sonestroug reasons. 'fite Con motwealth 'V. Mayloy, 7 P. F. Smit deciledhgalnsttioexorciseof this powe by the Courts of Quarte'r' Sessions ani Oyer and Termiinr, after the extliratlo of the term, notwithstandoig a rule ht been entered to slow calse against t1 setence. Tioe samo reasols thoere given would seem to apply as )yell this court. The fact that wo'oat 'as i;IV .A %i -'t-. 'a oourlof i'o'to'Vorrdo th'ii'ros'or diclii discretot; which'ldalitinlt' u';, towel cob rts,'does oiot sedtin'tiiioetUfy a only to that'wlich we pised upoo' be-. revhgicixof dorokn- fliai' IJil'dlments. fore, In order to consider it again. ' rhe law re~ulreh an nhd 6 ifligatiotl; Iaving, then, no ground of erro ' or anladmitting the'fivower lltiation nily mlitake. It ooir! forijoer 'judgment, the never conic to ali'end'; for'lthe sitfe actof 1870 havilg, noapplicatlon,.and power willtenable os torevidwtiJudg- tho defendant being it no better posi- ment of review, and'a on todes qotloies. tion by theopenihgof thejudgment, we The Englis authorltleti are agiist the are compelled to declltne openng It.'. power,nd there appear to be no good . .. .o + .p ' roe ri r toot improper, before closing, tq reasons Per Its exercise In this state, that i ay a few words Ito ranerepci to tioe aci do' not'exist' elsewhlere:' Tie power be- of 1870, to draN ,atooti ( ;61he of 16 In admoiitted after thiifirst t rin has to totio i go s o I 1oooied, titore is'no llmitat.oin*'of tione, dtectsemand to'ie radlcal chahgein.ur ,,; and thoI doors 'of prlsoms &ld' penitetnt criinal Jurisprudence It NiI pioduci and 6 dors'' o prionsAdP.. 11.It was' poissed for thtis Pais, bet, owitng tiarleisuaybe opened at any'tlono before t whOpasd no ti . c I awe ow nt.- sntec is iltalliexecuted. Toiselear t 'th Govoro' vetO, it caine t9Q late, ly would bean iufringemef't oftte par- tlnotlrVldcnle tht lsw which doning power, it our case;as muchas It art°the ofhtg of feelhiot are eldou.. could be affirnoed of the judges of the w! eiy framed. Itcouomanlstllecoort to review the evid-nee ald to dcvieie .l Inferior courts. It times of high cx- wether tild'ngredleoit stocoasteito' eitement, a change ufjudg would often wier the ini6eoleo c9ustrooA9 be tho signal for a change ihu'Jodg uents, n i11 rlu ilrab'deire9 'wtr1 preyad .; to exist, and yet, il forgetfulnessof thq Uponl caes oxcltlg the populr mind. formerlaw, I tprovldea owcaestotake, Blt, grantong theexistence of thoepower, frmer a, d to utito okc, for we do not decide it at tils time, It Is prrilerve and ,bring up tite avdcolnce. very clear It can be exercised by usonly ' ts lertael . t .o aude b to where we have made a raltake, or con- proves its o lrlhcieney, the Judge below witted anl error which Justiee requiras retuling to our certiorariv thot he was I us to rectify. Judicial discretion is not 'jot abl0 to make the return of the evIT the pleasore of the court, nor the arbi- doles. He is not bound by law to tak9, trary result of our will, but I Aovorned the testimony, or to certify to It. A Sby sound Judgtmetnt foutoded oo good bill of exceptlion brings tp, onlyipo reasci and controlei by a coiselotous itcofthi vlencoa may. be requir I convtteon of right. In this case, there ed to explaih tite point of law contoaled rloas been no nmistake made, no error In tie bill l. . at not to' g which our sense of Justice calls Upon us he ecitetftis la w om nt o o to correct. it cannot b pretended titat of ourJotdglent oo tloo formerwritf error tile whtole doctrile of thoe oriinal law g wos incorrect. We are now as flrtly as to the siceod od certainty of punish. e ef pitlun as tlell, thoa th dhfeniont Illelt, and left to the folon both tiellooe 0 iad is doy uoder tile act of 1810, atnd ano it door of esloe, not only froon the -t relledy remoitted to him utder tiot liw's deloty, but by prison breochI, ail or act. Ve are now es trloly of tio oloit- all te various ttteantsoo of avollig rtri- .r loot as then, tlat tile writ of error con- ,ltiive Justice. At this ttoment, two ecotteot to by tite Atorney-Geecril wai es Occur to ily ory of cottyc- o iinplrovidently lssoiel, aid brought tip tioiisenofiutroler hoAllegloeuycoottntyole- e with it nothing but the coliioon law loyed by dilatoy notiotts, where the record. If, tioerefore, we shoulnel n rioondors°peoed byuiokiewm uns, Open tile Juogletot Io tiatcasemit wooll and tbeprisoiersescoled forever. Any .0 be an act of questiontable power io the murderer iay, oler this lItw-though, , first place, and (itteofnlaresymiootioy in like Pro'ist, lie tlay hitavo uurdered O u tioe secono; atd oot fle exercie of a whole fanily-takoutt hiswo'itoferror, I sou nd Jticial odiseretio. of witloout lhitatilo of timu or conditilo', l. , hut, slolod woperntilt ynpathiy to whether in ptrisol tnder sentence, of' o override juolginet, how is tite defend- steping upoo the trap of tite gollows, o alit's situatlon bettered. - ioe formoter with catioto or without it, id sinailend at writ of error was not pending at thO his caio until the text torm of the Su- u, passage of the et of 1870, attd therefore prenle Court. No one could condenn t not then withi its terns.,-lf not tilet hhu, if, the deatlo warrant tiot prevenit- o- within the law, nothiog'but another iug, ho should italt till the tern of the n law can llace It titre. Ours is not the lirenloCqurt be passed, atd thit ake a- power of legielatiou, and the molment out I1s writ of error to delay the oxeck-. rt we doterminc Juilllally,.as we iust, lio of Ilis sotenoe fovr a whole Ye'ar. 0o that the case was toot within the law, Thlt onlysccurlty to ity Poublic, the opt- n ' no act of ours, or etfort of ours, calt allhation of thoe case and allowantce of to bring it withih the law. If not tion tio writ for cause, ie ropcled, . To u0, d. peidlng, tle fact of opening the Judg- asJudgeq, it tnakel no dlol-rolce. for to . - mit and tnaking It a writ now pond- us. it is immaterial wlhether wq.her Iog, does not draw it within tho folds or civil or crioinal cases, Ilideed,,it Is o- tho law by any retro-oporation of ours; mgro easy to declde on the oerits of tho h, but we are merely sent back to the caso oviletl.e in a crinolual case, than upon a or as' it stood when final Judgmoent was oilhlcult and abtrusoe quqstion of law Iu Ad rondered before tho passage of tle law. a .oniplicitedclyi aW, , J n We can' havo before us nothing but -.The motion to open tho.Judgment in Ad what wetheon ad beforeusuand tatwas tie former writ of error, Is refused, and .e the common law record. If we open It on tlis,writ of error Judgment Is given n to considerit aoew, we consider It not by for the Cotnmonwealth,.oo the plea of to force of the act of 1870, for that did not former Judguont, and, the record ie or. a embrace it, but by force only, of our Ju- dered to be.rcmitted.,Letd Gaette,, tl0 0, I ' ,',i ,.,.. , i ' '. ,. ;',i- 1 :,i ii.. ','I.,l' f' i*oio '11: :4

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most