State v. Geary
| Citation | 49 P. 596,58 Kan. 502 |
| Decision Date | 10 July 1897 |
| Docket Number | 10782 |
| Parties | THE STATE OF KANSAS v. BULL GEARY |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Kansas |
Decided January, 1897.
Appeal from Wyandotte District Court. Hon. W. G. Holt, Judge.
Judgment affirmed.
L. C Boyle, Attorney General, Sam'l Miller, County Attorney and I. F. Bradley, for the State.
F. E & J. A. Smith, for appellant.
The defendant was charged by information with the crime of robbery. Upon the trial in the court below he filed a plea in abatement alleging that he had not been accorded a preliminary hearing. In support of his plea, he introduced in evidence the transcript of the justice of the peace before whom he had been brought and who had certified his case to the trial court. This transcript showed that, on October 13, 1896, a complaint was filed charging defendant with the crime of assault with intent to commit robbery, and not with robbery itself; that a warrant of arrest, reciting the offense charged in the complaint, was issued on the same day and executed on the day following; and that, by order of the justice, the case was set for hearing for the nineteenth day of the month. The transcript further showed that, on the day of the hearing, an amended complaint was filed, and a new warrant of arrest issued upon such amended complaint. What the allegations of this amended complaint were, does not appear; neither does the transcript show what recitals of the commission of crime were made in the new or alias warrant. Upon the hearing of the case, the justice found and adjudged as follows: etc.
In addition to the transcript and warrant spoken of, the defendant also offered in evidence, in support of his plea, a paper marked "amended warrant," dated October 19, 1896, reciting the commission of robbery by him, together with an officer's return showing the defendant's arrest and the bringing him before the magistrate on the same day for trial. This amended warrant did not show, when offered in evidence, that it had been filed by the justice of the peace; but the justice, being present in the court-room, was allowed by the court to indorse on the back of such warrant a filing as of October 19, 1896, and was allowed to amend his transcript so as to show an execution, return, and filing of the same on such day. The justice of the peace, being called as a witness, identified the paper marked "amended warrant" as the order for defendant's arrest issued by and returned to him on the nineteenth day of October, 1896, and explained that he had carelessly omitted to file it, and to note it on his docket. Thereupon the plea in abatement was overruled; to which ruling the defendant saved exceptions.
It was within the power of the justice of the peace, after the case had been certified by him to the trial court to complete his transcript, and otherwise to perform the clerical duties he should have performed upon the preliminary hearing. This case is unlike that of Stuttle v. Bowers (31 Kan. 432, 2 P. 806). In that case, it was held that, after an appeal of a civil action had been taken by the filing and approval of an appeal bond, a justice of the peace had no power to alter his record so as to show a judgment by confession instead of by default or upon trial, as it had at first shown. In this case, nothing of that kind was done. The justice of the peace had certified an incomplete transcript, and had failed to perform the ministerial duty of placing his file marks upon all the papers. He changed nothing; he simply completed the performance of his duty. Under section 64 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the court may order defaulting magistrates to certify and return the record of preliminary examinations of accused persons held by them for trial, and in case of disobedience, may punish such magistrates as for contempt. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Brown, 45546
...whom the first trial was had could attach his certificate and thus complete his transcript. This is the proper practice. The State v. Geary, 58 Kan. 502, 49 P. 596.)' (75 Kan. pp. 853, 854, 90 P. p. A new term of the Reno district court commenced on September 23, 1968. The state's request t......
-
State v. McGann
... ... 481.) There is no question ... but that the magistrate had a perfect right by leave of the ... court to amend his certificate so as to make it state the ... actual facts in regard to the taking of the depositions and ... to put it in such a form as the statute required. (State ... v. Geary, 58 Kan. 502, 49 P. 596; People v ... Lane, 101 Cal. 513, 36 P. 16; Ex parte Keil, 85 Cal ... 310, 24 P. 742.) "The limit of the county is the limit ... of jurisdiction in matters of preliminary examinations." ... (State v. Griffin, 4 Idaho 462, 40 P. 58.) It will ... hardly be contended ... ...
-
State v. Howland
...make it speak the truth by making additional entries not inconsistent with the record as previously made and certified. See State v. Geary, 58 Kan. 502, 49 P. 596; State Handrub, 113 Kan. 12, 213 P. 827, and State v. Parise, 117 Kan. 106. 230 P. 304. Under the statutes pertaining to prelimi......
-
State v. Pigg
... ... The failure of the clerk to sign the certificate attached to ... the transcript was a mere oversight, and the district court ... properly permitted the certificate to be amended by having ... the clerk attach his signature. (The State v. Geary, 58 Kan ... 502, 49 P. 596.) There is nothing substantial in the claim ... that the certificate shows that the preliminary examination ... was held before the clerk instead of before the judge ... On the ... trial the state offered in evidence the money which it is ... claimed had ... ...