Montgomery v. State
| Decision Date | 13 October 1914 |
| Docket Number | 22,654 |
| Citation | 106 N.E. 370,182 Ind. 276 |
| Parties | Montgomery v. State of Indiana |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
From Vigo Circuit Court; Charles M. Fortune, Judge.
Proceeding on information for indirect contempt against Harry S. Montgomery. From a judgment adjudging him to be in contempt, the defendant appeals.
Appeal dismissed.
Charles S. Batt, for appellant.
Thomas M. Honan, Attorney-General, and Thomas H. Branaman, for the State.
Appellant was charged by information filed in the court below with having committed an indirect contempt of its authority by an attempt to take from it and its officials certain documentary evidence alleged to be relevant and material in certain criminal charges then under investigation by that court and the grand jury acting with it. A rule was served on appellant to appear and show cause why he should not be attached and punished for the alleged contempt. He appeared in response to this rule and filed an answer which the court deemed insufficient to purge appellant of the contempt charged and he was adjudged guilty, fined $ 100 and sentenced to thirty days imprisonment in jail. This judgment the court suspended during appellant's good behavior without objection or exception from appellant.
In this appeal numerous errors are assigned. The Attorney-General, however, has interposed objection to the consideration of them by a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that an appeal will only lie from a final judgment and that where sentence is suspended there is no final judgment and therefore no basis for an appeal. The motion is well founded. The question has been decided by this court favorably to the position of the Attorney-General. Walther v. State (1913), 179 Ind. 565, 101 N.E. 1005.
Appeal dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Todd v. State, 28697
...1899, 153 Ind. 232, 54 N.E. 802; Walther v. State, 1913, 179 Ind. 565, 567, 101 N.E. 1005, and cases cited; Montgomery v. State, 1914, 182 Ind. 276, 277, 106 N.E. 370. A final judgment, whether in a civil or criminal case, has been aptly defined by this and the appellate court thus: 'A fina......
-
Desho v. State
...action. Ewbank, Criminal Law (Symmes Ed.), Sec. 527; Bozovichar v. State, 1952, 230 Ind. 358, 103 N.E.2d 680; Montgomery v. State, 1914, 182 Ind. 276, 106 N.E. 370; Smith v. State, 1956, 234 Ind. 691, 131 N.E.2d 148; Farrell v. State, 1855, 7 Ind. 345; 2 Flanagan, Indiana Trial and Appellat......
-
Selke v. State
... ... --------- ... [1] Section 9-2301, Burns' ... Ind.St.Ann.1933, section 2366 Baldwin's Ind.St.1934, Acts ... 1905, c. 169, § 324, p. 584 ... [2] State v. Uptgaft (1899) 153 Ind. 232, 54 ... N.E. 802; Walther v. State (1913) 179 Ind. 565, 101 N.E ... 1005; Montgomery v. State (1914) 182 Ind. 276, 106 N.E ... [3] Carman v. State (Ind.Sup.1935) 196 ... ...
-
Sutton v. State
... ... was committed in dismissing the appeal which appellant tried ... to perfect by filing a recognizance on the forty-seventh day ... Appellant ... cites and relies upon the cases of Walther v ... State (1913), 179 Ind. 565, 101 N.E. 1005, and ... Montgomery v. State (1914), 182 Ind. 276, ... 106 N.E. 370. But in so far as those cases may be understood ... to hold that a judgment convicting a defendant of a criminal ... offense and sentencing him to the payment of a fine and to ... imprisonment was a mere interlocutory order from which no ... ...