State v. Miller
| Decision Date | 11 December 1914 |
| Docket Number | 12066. |
| Citation | 82 Wash. 477,144 P. 693 |
| Parties | STATE v. MILLER. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Department 2. Appeal from Superior Court, King County; J. T. Ronald Judge.
Peter Miller was convicted of burglary, and he appeals. Affirmed.
See also, 141 P. 1139.
Jos. M Glasgow, of Seattle, for appellant.
John F Murphy, Everett C. Ellis, and Herbert B. Butler, all of Seattle, for the State.
On August 10, 1909, the defendant in this case was charged by information with the crime of burglary in the first degree. The case was brought on for trial on October 29, 1909, and resulted in a verdict of guilty of burglary in the second degree. From the judgment entered upon the verdict an appeal was prosecuted which resulted in a reversal. State v. Miller, 61 Wash. 125, 111 P. 1053, Ann. Cas. 1912B, 1053. On February 15, 1911, the remittitur from this court was filed in the office of the clerk of the superior court. On September 30, 1912, upon the application of the prosecuting attorney, the cause was set for trial on October 29, 1912. Counsel for the defendant objected to the case being set for trial, and moved the court for a dismissal. The basis of the motion was that the case had not been brought to trial within 60 days after filing the remittitur with the clerk of the superior court. Upon hearing upon this motion the court entered a judgment of dismissal. From this judgment the state appealed, and the judgment was reversed. State v. Miller, 72 Wash. 154, 129 P. 1100. Thereafter the defendant was again placed upon trial and was found guilty of burglary in the second degree. From the judgment entered upon the verdict, the present appeal is prosecuted.
The only error assigned is, that after the judgment of dismissal had once been entered, the court was subsequently without jurisdiction to try the cause. The question then is whether the state had the right to appeal from such judgment.
The general rule is that the state in a criminal case has no right to appeal from an adverse judgment unless such right is given by statute. U.S. v. Sanges, 144 U.S. 310, 12 S.Ct. 609, 36 L.Ed. 445; State v. Johnson, 24 Wash. 75, 63 P. 1124.
By section 1716, Rem. & Bal. Code, the state is given the right to appeal in a criminal case when the error complained of is in setting aside the indictment or information, or in arresting the judgment, on the ground that the facts stated in the indictment or information do not constitute a crime 'or is some other material error in law not affecting the acquittal of the prisoner on the merits.' By this statute the state may appeal when the error complained of is one of law not affecting the acquittal of the prisoner on the merits. The error which inhered in the judgment of dismissal was as to the interpretation of section 2312, Rem. & Bal. Code, which provides that the defendant, when his trial has not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Little
...Cal.App. 672 (130 P. 184); State v. Buechler, 57 Ohio St. 95 (48 N.E. 507); State v. Morrison, 165 Ind. 461 (75 N.E. 968); State v. Miller, 82 Wash. 477 (144 P. 693); People v. Knowles, 27 Cal.App. 498 (155 P. The acquittal of the defendant rendered him immune from further prosecution for t......
-
State v. Little
...20 Cal. App. 672, 130 P. 184;State v. Buechler, 57 Ohio, 95, 48 N. E. 507;State v. Morrison, 165 Ind. 461, 75 N. E. 968;State v. Miller, 82 Wash. 477, 144 P. 693;People v. Knowles, 27 Cal. App. 498, 155 P. 137. The acquittal of the defendant rendered him immune from further prosecution for ......
-
State v. Buckman, 34130
...the defendant by a jury.' Accordingly, by the express terms of our rules on appeal, the state has a right of appeal. See State v. Miller, 1914, 82 Wash. 477, 144 P. 693. We turn briefly to the question of jurisdiction raised by the respondent. In essence, his contention is that RCW 3.20.120......