Ex Parte Williams

• Decision Date: 11 February 1946
• Docket Number: 8786
• Citation: 71 S.D. 95,21 N.W.2d 593
• Parties: IN THE MATTER OF APPLICATION OF C. ROY WILLIAMS for a Writ of Habeas Corpus.
• Court: South Dakota Supreme Court

71 SD 95, 21 NW2d 593 (1946)

IN THE MATTER OF APPLICATION OF C. ROY WILLIAMS

for a Writ of Habeas Corpus.

South Dakota Supreme Court

Appeal from Circuit Court, Lawrence County, SD

Hon. Chas. R. Hayes, Judge

#8786—Affirmed

Frances J. Parker, Deadwood, SD

Attorney for Appellant.

Paul H. Bek, County Attorney, Seward, NE

Clinton G. Richards, Deadwood, SD

Attorneys for Respondent.

Opinion Filed Feb 11, 1946

SICKEL, Judge.

C. Roy Williams was charged with crime in a complaint filed before a magistrate in Seward county, Nebraska. He was found in this state and was returned to Nebraska in extradition proceedings. Thereafter, an information was filed in the district court charging him with the issuance of two bad checks, one for $11.05 and the other for $10. The information contained six counts, three on each check. Counts one and two charged forgery; counts three and four charged that the checks were issued without funds. The charges contained in these four counts were felonies. Counts five and six charged that the checks were issued without sufficient funds on deposit to pay them. These charges were misdemeanors. The defendant was arraigned in district court on June 29, 1942. He pleaded not guilty to counts one to four, and pleaded guilty to counts five and six. Then, at the request of the county attorney, the matter of sentence on counts five and six was “taken under consideration for investigation, until disposal by trial or disposition otherwise,” of counts one, two, three and four, and the case was set for trial November 2, 1942. Further continuances were granted, until the case was finally set for trial on December 15, 1942. Defendant failed to appear at that time as ordered by the court, his bond was forfeited and his re-arrest ordered. He was again found in South Dakota and the Governor of Nebraska again demanded his extradition. The extradition warrant was issued by the Governor. Before delivery of the defendant to the agent of Nebraska, he applied to the circuit court of Lawrence county for a writ of habeas corpus. The application was denied and defendant has appealed.

Appellant claims that he is not a fugitive from justice. He does not deny that he has been charged with crime in Nebraska, but says that by subsequent acts and conduct of the Nebraska officers he is entitled to his discharge. The acts and conduct to which appellant refers consist of an understanding with the county attorney and the district judge before whom the criminal charges were pending, that the charges contained in the first four counts of the information would be dismissed; that appellant would pay a fine of $100 on each of the other two counts; that appellant would pay the cost of the criminal prosecution including the costs of the first extradition. Appellant further contends that he made restitution to the holders of the checks, paid the costs and left with his attorney a fund sufficient to pay the fines; that these funds were later deposited in the office of the clerk of the court; that in so doing he did everything required of him for the final disposition of the charges...