Blackburn v. State
| Decision Date | 31 December 1859 |
| Citation | 40 Tenn. 690 |
| Parties | JOSEPH BLACKBURN v. THE STATE. |
| Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
FROM DEKALB.
Demurrer to the plea of defendant, sustained by Judge Fite. He appealed.
M. M. Brien, for the plaintiff in error; Head, Attorney-General, for the State.
The plaintiff in error was presented for unlawful gaming, at the October term of the Circuit Court of DeKalb, for 1858. That term of the court was held by John P. Murry, who had been appointed by the Governor, to fill the vacancy occasioned by the death of the Honorable John L. Goodall, until the election was made by the people. At the February term, 1859, upon his arraignment, he filed a plea in abatement, that the said John P. Murry, who presided at the term of the court at which he was presented under the pro tem. appointment of the Governor, was under thirty years of age, and therefore not competent to exercise the functions of Judge of the Circuit Courts in this State. A demurrer to this plea was sustained by the court, and that is the error assigned for reversal.
It is true the Constitution requires a Circuit Judge to be thirty years of age. But if the appointing power confers the office upon one who is not competent, by that test the question is as to the effect upon his judgments, while he occupies and acts in the position. We think it is well settled that the judgment and official acts of an officer, de facto, are binding and valid, and the competency of the functionary acting under commission cannot be enquired into by parties affected by them. This principle was adopted through necessity to save the rights of persons having an interest in them, and to prevent a failure of justice. The doctrine is referred to and recognized in Moore v. The State, 5 Sneed, 514, and an unreported case at the last term here, and is more fully discussed in a case decided at the last term at Jackson, yet in manuscript. This renders it unnecessary, if not improper, to enter again into the argument and citation of authorities. The Governor's commission renders the functionary competent, and clothes him with powers of the office so far as his official acts are brought in question, by the parties concerned in, or affected by them. He may be removed from the office, and his powers terminated by the proper proceedings, but until that is done, his acts are binding.
The presentment was made at a term held by Judge Murry, but the arraignment and plea...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Calcutt v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp.
...L.Ed. 765 (1899). Or the officer might have flunked an eligibility requirement. Perhaps the officer was too young. Cf. Blackburn v. State , 40 Tenn. 690, 690–91 (1859). Or maybe the officer had been in the Congress that increased the office's salary before taking office. Cf. U.S. Const. art......
-
Baker v. State
...the appearance of being an intruder or usurper."); Ridout v. State, 161 Tenn. 248, 30 S.W.2d 255, 259 (1930) (quoting Blackburn v. State, 3 Head 690, [40 Tenn. 690 (1859)]) (where person elected judge sits beyond the term of court in which elected, official acts are not collaterally challen......
-
Wingler, In re
...is ineligible for the office, In re Russell, 60 N.C. 388; In re Danford, 157 Cal. 425, 108 P. 322; Sheehan's Case, supra; Blackburn v. State, 3 Head. 690, 40 Tenn. 690. The act of Mayor McNeil in trying the petitioner and committing her to jail was also immune to collateral attack under G.S......
-
Waters v. State ex rel. Schmutzer
...to judicial as to ministerial or other officers. McDowell v. United States, 159 U.S. 596, 16 S.Ct. 111, 40 L.Ed. 271 (1895); Blackburn v. State, 40 Tenn. 690 (1859). Our determination that the statutory provision attempting to designate the county executive as judge of the juvenile court, i......