Ex Parte Jackson

• Decision Date: 18 June 1888
• Citation: 96 Mo. 116,8 S.W. 800
• Parties: Ex parte JACKSON.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

8 S.W. 800

96 Mo. 116

Ex parte JACKSON.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

June 18, 1888.

1. CRIMINAL LAW — SENTENCE — CUMULATIVE IMPRISONMENT.

Where petitioner was convicted at the same term on three indictments for felony; and, on a subsequent day of that term, was sentenced to imprisonment for a term commencing from date, on the third conviction; and, on the following day, was sentenced to imprisonment on the first and second convictions, respectively, — each term to commence at the expiration of the one preceding it, — there was no such irregularity in the proceedings as would avoid the imprisonment, under Rev. St. Mo. § 1659, providing: "When any person is convicted of two or more offenses before sentence shall have been pronounced upon him for either offense, the imprisonment to which he shall be sentenced upon the second or subsequent conviction shall commence at the termination of the term of imprisonment to which he shall be adjudged upon prior conviction."

2. SAME — REVERSAL OF ONE OF THE JUDGMENTS — EFFECT ON SUBSEQUENT SENTENCE.

Where a prisoner was sentenced, at the same term of court, to three successive terms of imprisonment, the reversal of the judgment upon which he was sentenced to the second term of imprisonment does not entitle him to a discharge upon expiration of his first term, but the third term will begin immediately after the first has expired.

Original proceedings in habeas corpus.

F. E. Luckett and Ed. Silver, for petitioner. The Attorney General, for the State.

SHERWOOD, J.

In case No. 1,305, Jackson was on October 15th found guilty of forgery. In case No. 1,306, he was also found guilty of forgery on November 5, 1885. In case No. 1,307, he entered a plea of guilty of forgery on November 6, 1885. Subsequently sentences of imprisonment in the penitentiary were entered against him, as follows: In 1,307, imprisonment in the penitentiary for three years, commencing from date of sentence, November 6, 1885. On November 7, 1885, in case No. 1,305, imprisonment in the penitentiary for three years, commencing from expiration of sentence in the previous case. In case 1,306, on the same day, November 7th, imprisonment for three years from expiration of sentence in case No. 1,305. In the last-named case, Jackson appealed to this court, and such proceedings were had as caused a reversal of the judgment. Under the operation of the three-fourths rule, he has served out his term of imprisonment in case No. 1,307, and now is held by the warden by virtue of the sentence in case, 1,306, the last of the sentences imposed; and claims that, by virtue of the foregoing facts, he is entitled to his discharge. The section of the statute applicable to this case is as follows: "When any person is convicted of two or more offenses before sentence shall have been pronounced upon him for either offense, the imprisonment to which he shall be sentenced upon the second or other subsequent conviction shall commence at the termination of the term of imprisonment to which he shall be adjudged upon prior conviction." Rev. St. § 1659.

While it is true that the sentences imposed upon the petitioner might all have been pronounced against him upon the same day, it does not thence follow that there was anything either irregular or erroneous in imposing the respective sentences on him on two different days of the same term. The statute evidently...