Bailey v. State
| Decision Date | 21 June 1889 |
| Citation | 87 Ala. 44,6 So. 398 |
| Parties | BAILEY v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from criminal court, Jefferson county; S.E. GREENE, Judge.
An indictment contained two counts charging W. W. Bailey and others, with larceny and with receiving stolen goods. Bailey was found guilty under the second count, the value of the stolen property being assessed at $20. He was sentenced to hard labor for the county for six months, and to an additional term of 143 days on non-payment of the costs. He moved to have the costs re-taxed. The motion being overruled he excepted, and appeals.
B M. Allen, for appellant.
W L. Martin, Atty. Gen., for the State.
The defendant, being convicted of larceny, was sentenced to perform hard labor for the county of Jefferson, for a period of time not exceeding eight months, to satisfy certain costs incurred in the prosecution of the case, and taxed as fees in favor of the solicitor, clerk of the court, sheriff, and certain state witnesses. The sentence seems to have been made in accordance with the rules prescribed by section 4504 of the present Code, which provides for the sentence of convicts to additional hard labor imposed for costs, if not presently paid or judgment is not confessed therefor, as provided by law.
We have repeatedly held that imprisonment of one convicted of crime for the satisfaction of costs incurred by the state in his prosecution, or to which the state, if it were liable for costs, should be subjected, is not an infringement of that provision of the constitution which provides that "no person shall be imprisoned for debt." Bradley v. State, 69 Ala. 318; 3 Brick. Dig. p. 141, § 197 et seq., and cases cited.
The authority of these decisions is not denied. But it is contended that, inasmuch as the defendant in this case is sentenced to hard labor under the provisions of the act approved February 18, 1887, entitled "An act relating to the working of male convicts sentenced to hard labor for the county of Jefferson, upon the public roads of said county," (Acts 1886-87, pp. 818-821,) the fees are no longer due the officers and witnesses, and there is no authority for the enforcement of their collection by hard labor.
The only sections of this act which bear particularly on the case are sections 11 and 16. There is nothing anywhere found in its provisions that can be construed as intended to repeal sections 4502 to 4504 of the present Code, (1886,) which authorize the defendant to pay the fine and costs, or confess judgment therefor, with good and sufficient sureties, as in other cases. It is only where the fine and costs are not presently paid, or secured by confession of judgment, with...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Kilmer
... ... imprisonment as an alternative for the payment of a fine is ... not an imprisonment for debt, and the same principles apply ... in the case of costs which are imposed as a part of a fine, ... and as a penalty for the transgression. Dixon v ... State, 2 Tex. 481, 482; Bailey v. State, 87 ... Ala. 44, 6 So. 398; Morgan v. State, 47 Ala. 34; Re ... Boyd, 34 Kan. 570, 9 P. 240 ... The ... second assignment of error is that "the court erred in ... assuming the jurisdiction of the case, for the reason that no ... proper preliminary examination had ... ...
-
State v. Kilmer
...the case of costs, which are imposed as a part of a fine and as a penalty for the transgression. Dixon v. State, 2 Tex. 481, 482;Bailey v. State, 87 Ala. 44, 6 South. 398;Morgan v. State, 47 Ala. 34;In re Boyd, 34 Kan. 570, 9 Pac. 240. [2] The second assignment of error is that: “The court ......
-
In re McDonald
... ... (Gregg v. Cook, Peck ... (Tenn.), 82; Archer v. Ross, 2 Scan., 303; ... Cooper v. Am. Ins. Co., 3 Colo., 318; Grable v ... State, 2 Greene, 559; Davis v. Fish, 1 G ... Greene, 406; Ex parte Lilly, 7 S.C. 374; Smith v ... Chichester, 1 Cal. 409; Northwood v. Canfield, ... ordinance), is only a consequence of the power to fine." ... Ex parte Bollig, 31 Ill. 88. In Bailey v. State, 87 ... Ala. 44, 6 So. 398, the court say: "We have repeatedly ... held that imprisonment of one convicted of crime, for the ... ...
-
Jones v. Tarleton
...the state, are not in violation of the Constitution, has been upheld so often that it is hardly necessary to cite authority. Bailey v. State, 87 Ala. 44, 6 So. 398. But it partakes of the character of a debt or not, or whether an action for debt would lie for its collection, it certainly ca......