Peed v. Brewster

• Decision Date: 30 January 1907
• Docket Number: No. 20,781.,20,781.
• Citation: 168 Ind. 51,79 N.E. 1039
• Parties: PEED, Sheriff, v. BREWSTER.
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court

168 Ind. 51

79 N.E. 1039

PEED, Sheriff,

v.BREWSTER.

No. 20,781.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

Jan. 30, 1907.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Pike County; E. A. Ely, Judge.

Habeas corpus on petition of Bill Brewster against Orion Peed, as sheriff, etc. From a judgment directing petitioner's release from custody, the sheriff appeals. Affirmed.

Bomar Traylor and S. M. Krigg, for appellant. J. W. Wilson, for appellee.

MONTGOMERY, C. J.

Appellee was arraigned in the Pike circuit court on February 10, 1905, upon seven separate and distinct indictments charging him with unlawful sales of intoxicating liquor, and to each indictment he entered a plea of guilty, and it was thereupon adjudged by said court in each of said cases that he make his fine to the state in the sum of $25 and pay the costs amounting to $7, and that he stand committed to the jail of the county until such fine and costs be paid or replevied. Failing to pay or replevy any part of such fines and costs, appellee was immediately taken into custody by the sheriff by virtue of said judgments, and confined in the county jail for 32 full days, after which he sued out a writ of habeas corpus to obtain his liberty. The petition averred the facts above set out in substance, and that the appellee had no property and was unable to pay such fines and costs. The writ was issued, and in response thereto appellant appeared and moved to quash the same. This motion was overruled by the court, and, appellant electing to stand upon said motion and declining to plead further, judgment was rendered releasing appellee from custody.

The overruling of appellant's motion to quash the writ is the only alleged error assigned. The statute in pursuance of which appellee was committed to jail reads as follows: “When the defendant is adjudged to pay any fine and costs, the court shall order him to be committed to the jail of the county until the same are paid or replevied. Such judgment shall be without relief from valuation or appraisement laws.” Section 1926, Burns' Ann. St. 1901. The statute by virtue of which appellee sought his liberty is as follows: “Any person imprisoned for failure to pay or replevy any fine or costs may be ordered to be discharged by the court, or by the judge of any court, after being imprisoned one day for every dollar of the fine and costs, if it appear by satisfactory proof that such person is unable to pay or replevy the same, but the execution may issue against the property of the defendant, as in other judgments.” Section 1931, Burns' Ann. St. 1901. Section 1932,...