In re Fitton

• Decision Date: 22 June 1896
• Citation: 68 Vt. 297,35 A. 319
• Parties: In re FITTON.
• Court: Vermont Supreme Court

35 A. 319

68 Vt. 297

In re FITTON.

Supreme Court of Vermont Windsor.

June 22, 1896.

Petition by Robert Fitton for a writ of habeas corpus. Remanded.

Robert Fitton, pro se.

W. W. Stickney and J. G. Sargent, for the State.

MUNSON, J. The relator was indicted for perjury at the December term of the Windsor county court in 1887, was tried on said charge at the May term of that court in 1891, and on conviction thereof was sentenced to the state prison at Windsor, where he was confined. The relator claims that his detention is unlawful, because of illegalities in the proceedings by which he was brought to trial. It appears that after this indictment was found the relator absented himself from the state, but that he came into the state at Bennington in January, 1891, as John Rice, and was afterwards at Troy, in the state of New York. It being claimed that a larceny had been committed at Bennington by the person known as John Rice, a demand for the surrender of such person was made by the governor, but his requisition was not complied with. The relator, understanding that there were some informalities in the papers which required correction and would cause delay, consented to return to this state, upon receiving from the office a written statement that he was taken only upon the charge of larceny. He was held to bail upon this charge at Bennington, and, upon giving satisfactory surety for his appearance therein, was arrested upon a charge of intoxication, and was held upon that charge until he was taken on a capias issued by the clerk of the Windsor county court upon the above indictment. Upon being committed to the Windsor county jail on this arrest, the relator obtained a writ of habeas corpus from the United States district judge, which writ was taken into the circuit court, then in session, and upon a hearing in that court the relator was discharged from custody, with protection from arrest for one day. 45 Fed. 471. An appeal from this decision was taken to the supreme court by both the relator and the state, and the relator was released on giving bail for his appearance to abide the decision of that court. The case was taken up on the relator's appeal, and on his failure to prosecute the same the cause was dismissed April 22, 1891, the mandate being filed in the circuit court April 28th. The petition shows further that on July 12, 1891, the relator was brought into the circuit court on a writ of habeas corpus, and that proceedings were then had in regard to his bail. In April, 1891, the relator was in Windsor county jail upon a warrant of commitment issued in proceedings for contempt, and while so in confinement he was again committed in default of bail upon a charge of jail breaking. He was brought to trial upon this last-named charge at the May term, and upon conviction was sentenced, June 13th, to confinement in the state prison. After this, the relator being thus in the Windsor county jail, he was brought into court, and put to trial upon the indictment for perjury above mentioned, protesting, however, that he was not legally called upon to make answer thereto. There was no rearrest of the relator upon the charge of perjury.

It is claimed by the relator that he was under the jurisdiction of the circuit court by reason of his bail until July 12th, and so was not amenable to the state court at the time of his trial. This position...