Graham v. Weeks

• Decision Date: 02 March 1891
• Citation: Graham v. Weeks, 138 U.S. 461, 11 S.Ct. 363, 34 L.Ed. 1051 (1891)
• Parties: GRAHAM v. WEEKS, Warden of the Wisconsin State-Prison
• Court: U.S. Supreme Court

138 U.S. 461

11 S.Ct. 363

34 L.Ed. 1051

GRAHAM v. WEEKS, Warden of the Wisconsin State-Prison.

March 2, 1891.

Rublee A. Cole, for plaintiff in error.

R. M. La Follette, for defendant in error.

Mr. Justice FIELD, after stating the facts as above, delivered the opinion of the court.

It is undoubtedly the general rule that a judgment rendered by a court in a criminal case must conform strictly to the statute, and that any variation from its provisions, either in the character or the extent of punishment inflicted, renders the judgment absolutely void; but it seems that under the law of Wisconsin a judgment in a criminal case, which merely exceeds in the time of punishment prescribed by the sentence that which is authorized by law, is not absolutely void, but only erroneous, and that the error must be corrected on appeal, and cannot be corrected by a writ of habeas corpus. It would seem that a distinction is there made between those cases in which the judgment is irregular, as being in excess of the time prescribed, and those in which it is void, as changing the nature of the punishment from that authorized by the law; and that in the former class, until the time is reached which is prescribed by statute as the limit of the power of the court to punish the prisoner, he has no remedy by habeas corpus. If such be the law of the state, as would appear by this decision and the argument of counsel, we do not see that we have any right to interfere. That the prisoner should not have been sentenced for any time in excess of 10 years is very evident. When the 10 years have expired it is probable the court will order the prisoner's discharge, but until then he has no right to ask the annulment of the entire judgment. Such being the ruling of the state court, and there being nothing in it repugnant to any principle of natural justice, we think that the reason given for a refusal of the writ of habeas corpus...