State v. Grottkau

Citation41 N.W. 80,73 Wis. 589
PartiesSTATE v. GROTTKAU.
Decision Date22 December 1888
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Error to circuit court, Milwaukee county.

Paul Grottkau was indicted, tried, and convicted in the municipal court of Milwaukee county of the offense of riot, and on May 17, 1887, was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for one year in the house of correction. Before execution of such sentence, and on May 14, 1887, that court granted a stay of execution of the judgment, pending the determination of the case by this court, to which it was brought by writ of error. Grottkau gave the required security, and was released from custody. This court affirmed the judgment of the municipal court.1 The remittitur from this court was filed in the municipal court March 13, 1888. On or about April 5, 1888, Grottkau was committed to the house of correction pursuant to the sentence. May 8, 1888, he was brought before Court Commissioner Hugh Ryan, Esq., by virtue of a writ of habeas corpus duly issued, and a hearing was had. On May 12th the commissioner made an order remanding Grottkau to the custody of the keeper of the house of correction, and dismissed the proceeding. The matter was removed by certiorari to the circuit court, and that court, by its order and judgment, bearing date May 21, 1888, discharged Grottkau from custody. The state thereupon sued out a writ of error, by virtue of which such order and judgment and all the proceedings preliminary thereto have been certified to this court for review.Atty. Gen. C. E. Estabrook, for the State.

LYON, J., ( after stating the facts as above.)

We have not been favored with an argument or brief in behalf of defendant in error, and for that reason shall not indulge in any extended discussion of the questions which might be raised upon the record before us. Indeed, we shall consider but one of those questions, and that but briefly. Doubtless the circuit court discharged Grottkau from custody because the year for which he was sentenced to imprisonment had expired when the writ of habeas corpus was issued. Hence that court must have held that his term of imprisonment commenced when judgment and sentence were pronounced, and that the commencement of such term was not postponed, nor the running thereof suspended by the stay of execution, and his release on bail, pending the decision of this court. Whether this is a correct view of the law or not is the single question we propose now to determine.

In the case of McCormick, 24 Wis. 492, a sentence to imprisonment on a conviction for crime, not to commence until the expiration of another sentence of the same person on a conviction for another crime, was upheld....

To continue reading

Request your trial
19 cases
  • Carruth v. Taylor
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Dakota
    • November 28, 1898
    ...... The petitioner has attempted to appeal to this Court from. said order, and, with that end in view, has served a notice. of appeal upon the state's attorney for Grand Forks. county, and upon the attorney for said sheriff, and has filed. such notice with the clerk of the District Court for ... from Michigan, Missouri, and Iowa already cited. See, to the. same effect, State v. Grottkau, 73 Wis. 589, 41 N.W. 80, 1063. As our appeal law is taken literally. from the statutes of Wisconsin, it is quite pertinent to the. question ......
  • Macomber v. Alexander
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oregon
    • April 8, 1953
    ...587, 190 So. 306; Edmonson v. Ramsay, 122 Miss. 450, 84 So. 455, 10 A.L.R. 380; and see notes 10 A.L.R. 385. In State v. Grottkau, 1889, 73 Wis. 589, 41 N.W. 80, 1063, it was held that there could be no appeal from an order discharging the prisoner from custody. However, the statute was ame......
  • State ex rel. McGovern v. Williams
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • May 8, 1908
    ...exercisable by the writ of mandamus, other adequate remedy is wanting. State v. Kemp, 17 Wis. 669;State v. Grottkau, 73 Wis. 589, 41 N. W. 80, 1063, 9 Am. St. Rep. 816; Van Rueden v. State, 96 Wis. 671, 676, 71 N. W. 1048;U. S. v. Sanges, 144 U. S. 310, 12 Sup. Ct. 609, 36 L. Ed. 445. The p......
  • Wisener v. Burrell
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oklahoma
    • April 14, 1911
    ...624, 56 P. 136; People v. Conant, 59 Mich. 565, 26 N.W. 768; People v. Fairman, 59 Mich. 568, 26 N.W. 769; State v. Grottkau, 73 Wis. 589, 41 N.W. 80, 1063, 9 Am. St. Rep. 816; State v. Miller, 97 N.C. 451, 1 S.E. 776; In re Clasby, 3 Utah 183, 1 P. 852; Wyeth v. Richardson, 10 Gray (Mass.)......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT