Bartley v. State

• Decision Date: 23 June 1887
• Docket Number: 13,834
• Citation: 12 N.E. 503,111 Ind. 358
• Parties: Bartley v. The State
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court

12 N.E. 503

111 Ind. 358

Bartley v. The State

No. 13,834

Supreme Court of Indiana

June 23, 1887

From the Noble Circuit Court.

The judgment is affirmed, with costs.

L. W Welker, for appellant.

L. T Michener, Attorney General, and J. H. Gillett, for the State.

OPINION

Niblack J.

Bartley, the appellant, was, at the March term, 1886, of the Noble Circuit Court, indicted for selling intoxicating liquor to one Albert Miller, a person under the age of twenty-one years.

At the succeeding December term, a jury found the appellant to be guilty as charged, and he was adjudged to pay a fine of twenty dollars and the costs of the prosecution.

It is complained only that the verdict was not sustained by sufficient evidence, and that the court erred in its instructions to the jury.

On the twenty-first judicial day of said December term, which was the 29th day of December, 1886, and the day on which judgment was rendered on the verdict, sixty days time was given to the appellant within which to prepare, and have signed, and to file his bill of exceptions containing the evidence, as well as the instructions given at the trial.

On the 23d day of February, 1887, the prosecuting attorney of the proper judicial circuit consented in writing that the time for preparing, signing and filing a bill of exceptions in the cause should be extended until the 15th day of April, 1887, and agreed to waive all irregularities which might result from such extension of time.

The bill of exceptions which we find copied into the record, and which purports to contain all the evidence and all the instructions given in the cause, is certified to us as having been filed on the 12th day of April, 1887.The attorney general makes the point that the prosecuting attorney had no power to extend the time for the filing of the bill of exceptions; that, consequently, his agreement to extend the time, as stated, was ineffectual to extend it, and that, for that reason, the bill of exceptions was not filed within the time limited by law, and has hence not been properly made a part of the record.

Section 1847, R. S. 1881, which constitutes a part of our present criminal code, is as follows: "All bills of exceptions in a criminal prosecution, must be made out and presented to the judge at the time of the trial, or within such time thereafter as the judge may allow, not exceeding sixty days from the time judgment is rendered; and th...