In re Joseph E. Gordon
| Decision Date | 02 May 1933 |
| Citation | 165 A. 905,105 Vt. 277 |
| Parties | IN RE JOSEPH E. GORDON |
| Court | Vermont Supreme Court |
February Term, 1933.
Parole---Nature Purpose, and Effect of Parole---Extradition---One Who Breaks Condition of Parole as "Fugitive from Justice."
1. A "parole" is a conditional release of a convict before expiration of his term of imprisonment, and partakes of nature of conditional pardon.
2. Purpose of parole is reformatory rather than punitive; and its effect is to keep prisoner in legal custody, though he be allowed to live outside prison walls.
3. Parole may be made subject to any conditions provided they are not unlawful, unreasonable, immoral, or impossible of performance, and, when accepted by prisoner, conditions become binding upon him.
4. Where paroled person disregarded condition in parole, which thereby became vacated, he was "fugitive from justice" and subject to extradition.
PETITION for writ of habeas corpus. Heard at February Term 1933, Supreme Court for Washington County.
Judgment that the petitioner is not illegally restrained of his liberty, and that he be remanded to the custody of the sheriff of Orange County that the mandate of the executive warrant may be carried into effect.
Marcell Conway for the petitioner.
Lawrence C. Jones, Attorney General, and F. Ray Keyser, State's attorney for the petitionees.
Present: POWERS, C. J., SLACK, MOULTON, THOMPSON, and GRAHAM, JJ.
The petitioner was convicted in the courts of the state of New York of the crime of bigamy--a felony in that jurisdiction. Having served a part of the prison sentence imposed upon him, he was paroled in the constructive custody of the warden of Sing Sing Prison. One of the conditions of his parole was that he should not depart the state of New York without the written consent of the commissioner of correction of that state. On his application, he was granted a leave of absence from that state for a period not exceeding three days. Thereunder, he left that state on June 13, 1932 and on the next day he arrived in this State, where he has since remained. He was duly declared delinquent by the New York authorities and a warrant for retaking him was issued July 5, 1932. He was located in this State and application was made to the Governor of New York for a requisition on the Governor of this State for the apprehension and surrender of the petitioner to officers of the state of New York that he might be returned to that state there to be dealt with according to law. Such requisition was granted and was presented to the Governor of this State. Upon consideration it was granted, and in due time the Governor of this State executed his warrant for the arrest and surrender of the petitioner. This warrant was executed by the arrest of the petitioner, and he is now in the custody of the sheriff of Orange County. The petitioner made application to a superior judge for a writ of habeas corpus, and, when it was denied, he filed a like petition with a Justice of this Court, which was adjourned into the February Term of this Court and has been fully heard and considered.
The rights of the petitioner depend largely upon the character and effect of his parole. A parole is a conditional release of a convict before the expiration of his term of imprisonment. It partakes of the nature of a conditional pardon. Fuller v. State, 122 Ala. 32, 26 So. 146, 45 L.R.A. 502, 82 Am. St. Rep. 1; In...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In the Matter of George Adrien Paquette
...stated in it and was bound by them. In re Conditional Discharge of Convicts, 73 Vt. 414, 423, 51 A. 10, 56 L.R.A. 658; In re Gordon, 105 Vt. 277, 279, 165 A. 905. He also bound by the provisions of the statute under which the executive clemency was extended to him. Fuller v. State, 122 Ala.......
-
State v. Dean Barnett
...... the condition be not unreasonable. In re Conditional . Discharge of Convicts , 73 Vt. 414, 419, 420, 51 A. 10, 56 L.R.A. 658; In re Gordon , 105 Vt. 277, 279,. 165 A. 905. . . Among. the conditions held legal in the cases cited in the. annotation, supra , are ......
-
Ex parte Parker
...... character. Its purpose was reformatory rather than punitive. In re Hall , 100 Vt. 197, 202, 136 A. 24; In re. Gordon , 105 Vt. 277, 279, 165 A. 905. . . While. there are some authorities that support the contention of the. petitioner, the ......
- Frank A. Walsh v. James Farrington
-
Ruminations
...of a convict before the expiration of the term of imprisonment and partakes of the nature of a conditional pardon. Ex parte Gordon, 105 Vt. 277 (1933). Probation is akin to the issuance of a conditional pardon. State v. Barnett, 110 Vt. 221 (1939). In 1937, in In re Ronan, Justice John C. S......