In re Raymond Soborsky
| Decision Date | 09 June 1938 |
| Parties | IN RE RAYMOND SOBORSKY |
| Court | Vermont Supreme Court |
May Term, 1938.
Confinement of Prisoner to Insane Hospital Held Not Permanent under Governor's Order---Provisions of P. L. 8794 Relating to Transfer of Insane Prisoners as Part of Sentence---Order of Governor under P. L. 8794 for Transfer of Insane Prisoner Not Exercise of Judicial Function---Transfer of Prisoner to Insane Hospital Not Deprivation of Liberty---Transfer Not without Due Process Though Made without Notice or Opportunity to Be Heard---Transfer and Commitment to Insane Hospital Held Legal.
1. Where prisoner was transferred from state prison and committed to state hospital for insane by order of the governor under P. L. 8794 for "such time as added to the time already served" by him "will equal the terms of his original sentences," the term of his commitment to such hospital was not permanent.
2. Provisions of P. L. 8794, relating to removal of insane prisoners to state hospital for insane, entered into and became part of sentences of prisoner sentenced after its enactment in its present form as though such provisions were spread upon record with sentences, and prisoner was subject to such provisions at all times after sentences were passed.
3. Provision of P. L. 8794 that insane prisoner may be removed to state hospital for insane upon order of governor based upon such expert examination as to insanity as he directs does not grant exercise of judicial function to governor since his act in such case is administrative rather than judicial.
4. Transfer of prisoner to state hospital for insane under provisions of P. L. 8794 does not deprive him of his liberty since that is done by original sentence, of which provisions of such statute form a part.
5. Transfer of prisoner from state prison and commitment to state hospital for insane under P. L. 8794 was not without due process, since determination of question of prisoner's sanity, being administrative function, could be lawfully exercised by governor without notice to prisoner or giving him opportunity to be heard or to present evidence as to his insanity.
6. In habeas corpus proceedings, held that transfer of prisoner from state prison and commitment to state hospital for insane under P. L. 8794 were legal.
PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS made directly to Supreme Court. The petition alleged that the petitioner was illegally confined at the Vermont state hospital for the insane by the superintendent of that institution. Return by the petitionee justifying the confinement of the petitioner under an order of the governor issued in accordance with the provisions of P. L. 8794 transferring the petitioner from the state prison, where he had been confined under sentences of the Windsor county court, and committing him to the said hospital. Heard at the May Term, 1938, of Supreme Court, Washington County. The opinion states the case.
It is adjudged that the petitioner is not illegally deprived of his liberty and he is remanded to his former custody, viz., into the custody of the superintendent of the Vermont state hospital for the insane at Waterbury in the County of Washington and State of Vermont; and his petition is dismissed.
John Molla for the petitioner.
Lawrence, C. Jones, Attorney General, for the petitionee.
Present: MOULTON, SHERBURNE, BUTTLES and STURTEVANT, JJ., and JEFFORDS, Supr. J.
This is an original petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The petition is brought by John Molla, Esq., a practicing attorney of this Court, in behalf of one Raymond Soborsky. Hereinafter the term "petitioner" refers to Soborsky. The petitioner alleges that he is without law or right confined at the Vermont state hospital for the insane at Waterbury, Vermont by Dr. J. C. O'Neil, superintendent of said state hospital. The following undisputed facts appear from petitionee's return.
At the June term of Windsor county court, in 1926, said Soborsky was convicted of two crimes, viz., burglary and assault with intent to kill. On the 14th of July, 1926, said court imposed sentence upon Soborsky in each of these cases. In the burglary case he was sentenced to be confined at the state prison at Windsor for the term of not less than six years nor more than eight years, and in the assault case he was sentenced to be confined in said prison for a term of not less than eight years nor more than ten years. These sentences were not to run concurrently. He was committed to said prison and began serving these sentences on July 14, 1926. Soborsky remained at said prison serving said sentences until June 19, 1937, when by authority of an order of the governor, issued in accordance with the provisions of P. L. sec. 8794, and not otherwise, he was transferred from said prison and committed to said Vermont state hospital for the insane at Waterbury, into the custody of Dr. J. C. O'Neil, superintendent of said hospital. He has been confined in the so-called criminal ward at said hospital. The term for which he is committed to said hospital as shown by said order is "* * * during the remainder of his said terms of imprisonment, to wit; such time as added to the time already served by the said Raymond Soborsky will equal the terms of his original sentences."
The petitioner contends that he is unlawfully confined at said hospital for the following reasons, viz.:
1. That his confinement at said hospital is not temporary, but permanent.
2. Because the law, by authority of which said order of transfer issued, attempts to give to the governor judicial powers and that he, as governor, cannot lawfully exercise such powers.
3. Because his transfer to said hospital was without due process of law, since he was not given notice of hearing or opportunity to be heard upon the issue of his insanity.
As to petitioner's first objection, it is sufficient to note that from that provision of the governor's order above quoted, the term of...
To continue reading
Request your trial