In re Josie Dunkerton
| Decision Date | 08 March 1919 |
| Docket Number | 22,303 |
| Parties | In re JOSIE DUNKERTON, Petitioner |
| Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Decided January, 1919.
Original proceeding in habeas corpus.
Application writ habeas corpus denied.
SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.
STATUTE--Establishing State Industrial Farm for Women--Statute Constitutional. Chapter 298 of the Laws of 1917, establishing a state industrial farm for women, does not violate section 1 of the fourteenth amendment to the constitution of the United States, nor section 1 of the bill of rights of the constitution of the state of Kansas, and does not deny the equal protection of the law to women convicted of offenses punishable by imprisonment.
A. M. Van Etchen, and Bert Van Louven, both of Coffeyville, for the petitioner.
Alfred G. Armstrong, county attorney, for the respondent; Thurman Hill, of Independence, of counsel.
Josie Dunkerton presents an application for a writ of habeas corpus. Notice of the hearing of the application has been given, and the matter is submitted on its merits. The petitioner is confined on the state industrial farm for women, under conviction for violating section 1 of chapter 215, Laws of 1917, commonly known as the "bone-dry" law. She argues that the act under which she is confined (Laws 1917, ch. 298) is unconstitutional, for the reason that it contravenes section 1 of the fourteenth amendment to the constitution of the United States, and for the further reason that it contravenes section 1 of the bill of rights of the constitution of the state of Kansas, in this, that the act denies the equal protection of the law to women over twenty-five years of age. To support this argument, the petitioner contends that, in every case where a woman is convicted of violating any criminal law, and punishment by imprisonment is prescribed, the act takes from the trial court the right to impose the minimum penalty on her; that it takes from that court the right to parole women; that, under the act, women must be sentenced to the penitentiary; and that in these respects the punishment of women is more severe than the punishment of men for the same offense.
Boys under the age of sixteen years, who commit offenses punishable by imprisonment, may be sent to the state reform school. (Gen. Stat. 1915, § 10081.) Girls under the age of eighteen years who commit similar offenses may be sent to the industrial school for girls. (Gen. Stat. 1915, § 10108.) Any male person between the ages of sixteen and twenty-five, who shall be convicted for the first time of any offense punishable by confinement in the state penitentiary, may be sent to the Kansas state industrial reformatory. (Gen. Stat. 1915, § 10053.) Under these statutes boys and girls, and men and women are not treated alike. Women cannot be sent to the state industrial reformatory. Boys over sixteen years of age cannot be sent to the state reform school, while girls between sixteen and eighteen years of age may be sent to the industrial school. Prior to the passage of the act now questioned, a woman over eighteen and under twenty-five, who committed an offense punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary was sent to that institution. She could not be sent to any one of the other three institutions. Reformation and education are the primary objects of the reform school, of the state industrial reformatory, and of the industrial school. Punishment is incidental only. These institutions are primarily schools, not prisons. The constitutionality of the acts creating them, and of the acts providing for confinement of violators of the law in them, has not heretofore been questioned on the ground now presented.
The statute under consideration establishes an industrial farm for women, to which all women above the age of eighteen years, who shall be convicted of any offense against the criminal laws of this state, must be sent. Section 5 of the act reads:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Londerholm v. Owens, 44620
...for reformation of the child. In support of the trial court's position the state relies on language in the case of In re Dunkerton, 104 Kan. 481, 179 P. 347, 3 A.L.R. 1611, as '* * * Reformation and education are the primary objects of the (boys) reform school, of the state industrial refor......
-
State v. Kallas
... ... laws have been generally held valid under the Federal ... Constitution. See the annotated case In re ... Dunkerton , 104 Kan. 481, 179 P. 347, 3 A.L.R. 1611 ... Furthermore, ... under the Penal Code of Utah it is recognized by Section ... 103-1-16, ... ...
-
Ex Parte Gosselin.
...which call attention to the fact that the statutes under consideration contained no element of discrimination. Petition of Dunkerton, 104 Kan. 481, 179 P. 347, 3 A.L.R. 1611; State v. Heitman, 105 Kan. 139, 181 P. 630, 8 A.L.R. 848; Platt v. Commonwealth, 256 Mass. 539, 152 N.E. 914. Both K......
- Bunning v. Rogers