State ex rel. Mollineaux v. Madison County Court
| Decision Date | 15 December 1896 |
| Citation | 37 S.W. 1126,136 Mo. 323 |
| Parties | The State ex rel. Mollineaux v. Madison County Court |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Certiorari to Madison County Court.
Writ quashed.
William N. Nalle with William M. Morgan for petitioner.
(1) It seems that certiorari, as well as an alias writ of habeas corpus from the superior court, is a remedy, particularly in a case where a court, an inferior tribunal, adjudicates. Proceedings by certiorari in connection with habeas corpus are in the nature of an appeal, or writ of error, and should bring up the record and proofs as fully as on appeal or writ of error. It is so at common law, as counsel believe. State ex rel. v. Mason, 77 Mo. 191; State v Neel, 3 S.W. (Ark.) 631; Hurd on Habeas Corpus [2 Ed.] 353. (2) "All persons shall be bailable by sufficient sureties," the exception being "capital offenses when the proof is evident or the presumption great." Const., sec. 26, art. 2. (3) The trial court, the judge, or clerk, must fix the bail, on presentation of the indictment, or on arrest. R. S. 1889, secs. 4123 and 4125. These omitting the duty, bail may be secured by the accused through habeas corpus proceedings. R. S. 1889, sec. 5385. (4) Upon the facts stated by petitioner and admitted as true, not being denied, the county court erred in remanding petitioner and in refusing to accept bail with sufficient sureties. An evident failure in duty and not an act of judicial judgment or discretion.
Relator indicted in the circuit court of Bollinger county for murder of the first degree was committed to the jail of Madison county for safe keeping. Afterward at the August term, 1896 (and on the fifth day of said month), of the county court of the county last named he sued out of said court a writ of habeas corpus, directed to the sheriff and jailer of that county, returnable forthwith, requiring said sheriff to produce his body in court, and show cause, if any he could, for his detention, and why he should not be admitted to bail. To this writ the sheriff made return according to the facts heretofore stated.
The county court, on hearing, refused to discharge the relator or to admit him to bail, and remanded him to the custody and keeping of said sheriff.
Thereafter on the twentieth day of August, 1896, relator made application to this court for a writ of certiorari directed to the county court aforesaid for the purpose of compelling said court to certify to this court a copy of the proceedings with respect to said writ of habeas corpus in order that the same might be reviewed.
In obedience to this writ the county court has caused to be certified to this court all the evidence introduced at the hearing of the habeas corpus by that body, which we are now asked to review, and, if is found that error was committed by that court, to remand the cause to said court with directions as to what course to pursue, or disposition to make of the proceedings.
By section 3, article 6, of the state constitution, the supreme court is given superintending control over all inferior courts, and power to issue writs of habeas corpus, mandamus, quo warranto, certiorari, and other original remedial writs, and to hear and determine the same; so there can be no question as to its power to issue the writ of certiorari in this case, and to review the action of the county court in so far as such action was judicial, if at all, in refusing to admit the relator to bail. The writ lies to review the action of an inferior tribunal, and to correct errors of law in case where no appeal lies from the ruling of such a tribunal, as in the case at hand, but not to review matters purely ministerial or discretionary.
By section 24, article 2, state constitution it is provided "that all persons shall be bailable by sufficient sureties, except for capital offenses, when the proof is evident or the presumption great."
In People v. Tinder, 19 Cal. at p. 543, in passing upon the question of the right of defendant who was under indictment for murder of the first degree to be admitted to bail, it was said: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Vernon County v. King
...36 S.W. 681 136 Mo. 309 The State ex rel. Vernon County, Appellant, v. King et al Supreme Court of Missouri, First DivisionDecember 15, 1896 ... ... Judgment affirmed in 38 ... ...