In re Petition of Carr

• Decision Date: 05 January 1882
• Citation: 28 Kan. 1
• Parties: In the matter of the petitions of TIMOTHY CARR AND JOHN DILLON, for writs of habeas corpus
• Court: Kansas Supreme Court

28 Kan. 1

In the matter of the petitions of TIMOTHY CARR AND JOHN DILLON, for writs of habeas corpus

Supreme Court of Kansas

January 5, 1882

Decided January, 1882.

Original Proceedings in Habeas Corpus.

TWO PETITIONS for writs of habeas corpus, filed in this court January 5, 1882--one thereof by Timothy Carr, and the other by John Dillon. The petitioners alleged that they were illegally deprived of their liberty by one W. D. Disbrow sheriff, and keeper of the common jail of the county of Shawnee, in the state of Kansas, at the city of Topeka, in the county and state aforesaid. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion herein, filed at the June, 1882 session of the court.

J. C. Tarsney, and J. G. Waters, for petitioners.

A. H. Vance, Geo. R. Peck, and W. C. Campbell, for The State.

HORTON C. J. All the Justices concurring.

OPINION

HORTON, C. J.:

Although these cases are separate and distinct, and although the offenses alleged are different, we shall consider them together, inasmuch as the facts in each case are very similar, and the cases have been presented to us at the. same time. Carr and Dillon were in the employ of the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Rld. Co. as section foremen, with headquarters at Kansas City, Mo. Carr was arrested for forging time-checks, Dillon for obtaining money under false pretenses from the company. Upon preliminary examinations at Topeka, in Shawnee county, Kansas, it was decided that the offenses charged had been committed; that there was. probable cause to believe the petitioners guilty as set forth in the complaints and warrants, and they were ordered to give bail for their appearance before the district court of Shawnee county at the next term thereof, to answer therefor. In default of bail, they were committed to the jail of the county.

The only question presented for our determination is as to the jurisdiction of the courts of Shawnee county. On the part of the petitioners, it is claimed that the supposed offenses set forth in the several complaints were commenced and consummated in the state of Missouri, and that the defendants are in no wise amenable to the criminal law of Kansas.

On the part of the counsel for the state, it is contended that the petitioners had no intention whatever of defrauding any one but the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Rld. Co.; that they only used the banks and other parties in Kansas City as a means to accomplish their ends, and as the time-checks finally reached the treasurer of the company at Topeka, within the state, and were accepted by the treasurer as genuine, the petitioners, upon coming within the state, were liable to arrest for the offenses charged. In this connection they refer to § 21, ch. 82, Comp. Laws of 1879, which reads: "Every person, being without the state, committing or consummating an offense by an agent or means within the state, is liable to be punished by the laws thereof in the same manner as if the prisoner had commenced and consummated the offense within the state."

It appears from the evidence that the company had a freight house, office, agent, and a corps of clerks, to transact its business at Kansas City. Among other duties, the freight agent at Kansas City had authority to collect money due for freight, pay back charges on freight from other roads, and remit the money of the company to its treasurer at Topeka, Kansas. He also had authority out of the funds of the company collected by him to pay off the valid obligations of the company upon proper vouchers. Supposing the checks forged by Carr valid obligations of the company, he made payments thereon within the state of Missouri. Afterward, the checks were sent by him to the treasurer's office of the company at Topeka, and he was given credit for them as so much cash. But the agent drew no money at Topeka on the checks, and the money with which the checks were paid had never been in the treasury of the company at Topeka, or in the possession of the company within this state. It is not claimed that the agent of the company at Kansas City acted in collusion with Carr, and upon the testimony such person was neither his guilty nor "innocent agent." As the forgeries were committed and uttered by Carr within the state of Missouri, and the forged checks actually cashed by the company in that state, the crime was wholly consummated within Missouri. Therefore, in our opinion, upon the evidence submitted for our consideration, the offense was not committed or consummated "by an agent or means within this state," and however criminal Carr may be, he must be tried and punished in Missouri--not here.

Upon Dillon's examination, it also appeared that all the transactions with which he was connected were done in Missouri. The false pretenses were made in Missouri, and the money he received was obtained by him in person in...