State v. Fowler
| Decision Date | 21 August 1936 |
| Docket Number | 26148. |
| Citation | 187 Wash. 450,60 P.2d 83 |
| Parties | STATE v. FOWLER. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Department 1.
Appeal from Superior Court, Spokane County; Fred H. Witt, Judge.
George Fowler was convicted of grand larceny and of being an habitual criminal, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
E. R Lindsey, of Spokane, for appellant.
Ralph E. Foley, Carl P. Lang, and Harvey Erickson, all of Spokane for the State.
George Fowler was convicted by a jury, in the superior court for Spokane county, of the crime of grand larceny, on December 5 1935. Thereupon, prior to the entry of any judgment on the verdict, an information was filed against him, under Rem.Rev.Stat. § 2286, charging him with being an habitual criminal on account of having been convicted of the grand larceny charge, just referred to, and four prior convictions of petit larceny, particularly describing the several convictions. Upon a plea of not guilty in the habitual criminal prosecution, the jury brought in a verdict in which they found the defendant guilty of being an habitual criminal, and further found that the defendant had been convicted of petit larceny four times prior to December 4 1935.
Thereupon judgment and sentence were entered against the defendant as being an habitual criminal. He has appealed.
The first assignment of error is that the judgment and sentence are void as being unknown to the laws of the state. A charge or accusation of this kind, however, is specially provided for in Rem.Rev.Stat. § 2286. The verdict of guilty supports the judgment and sentence.
The second assignment of error is that the court had no jurisdiction to try the case or pronounce judgment and sentence, there being nothing set forth in the information charging a crime known to the laws of the state or to confer jurisdiction on the court to hear and try and sentence the defendant.
The statute just referred to provides for judgment and sentence of being an habitual criminal where the facts required under the statute are pleaded and proven. This assignment, as argued, goes mostly to the procedure adopted, the contention being that, because the information does not charge something which per se is a crime, there can be no prosecution or conviction. Our decisions, however, are to the contrary. The procedure, approved in State ex rel. Edelstein v Huneke, 140 Wash. 385, 249 P. 784, 250 P. 469, State v. Kirkpatrick, 181 Wash....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Pillatos
...whether the defendant had prior convictions. See, e.g., State v. Courser, 199 Wash. 559, 560, 92 P.2d 264 (1939); State v. Fowler, 187 Wash. 450, 451, 60 P.2d 83 (1936); Le Pitre, 54 Wash. at 167, 103 P. 27. In Furth, we specifically approved the practice of sending issues to the jury that ......
-
State v. Lee
...State v. Lei, 59 Wash.2d 1, 4, 365 P.2d 609 (1961); State v. Jackovick, 56 Wash.2d 915, 917, 355 P.2d 976 (1960); State v. Fowler, 187 Wash. 450, 452, 60 P.2d 83 (1936); State v. Edelstein, 146 Wash. 221, 250, 262 P. 622 (1927); State ex rel. Edelstein v. Huneke, 140 Wash. 385, 392, 249 P. ......
-
State v. Davis
...560, 92 P.2d 264 (1939) (use of jury to adjudicate habitual offender status; statute silent regarding procedure); State v. Fowler, 187 Wash. 450, 451, 60 P.2d 83 (1936) (use of jury to adjudicate habitual offender status; statute silent regarding procedure); Rogoski v. Hammond, 9 Wash.App. ......
-
State v. Furth
... ... the crimes of burglary, grand larceny and of being an ... habitual criminal, it is prejudicial error to place Before ... the jury the habitual criminal charge during the trial of the ... substantive offenses. See, also, State v. Fowler, ... 187 Wash. 450, 60 P.2d 83 ... In ... State v. Delano, 189 Wash. 230, 64 P.2d 511, the ... defendant appealed from a conviction of the crime of forgery ... and being an habitual criminal. We held that, under ... Rem.Rev.Stat. § 2286, an habitual ... ...