State v. Morehart
| Decision Date | 08 July 1921 |
| Docket Number | No. 22489.,22489. |
| Citation | 149 Minn. 432,183 N.W. 960 |
| Parties | STATE v. MOREHART. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from District Court, Blue Earth County; W. L. Comstock, Judge.
Malcolm Morehart was convicted of attempting to have carnal knowledge of a girl 16 years old, and he appeals. Modified and remanded.
In passing sentence upon a man convicted of the crime of attempting to have carnal knowledge of a female under the age of 18 years, the district court may require the payment of such items of the state's disbursements as would be properly taxable against the defeated party in a civil action, in addition to the penalty imposed as punishment for the crime.
Such disbursements must be properly ascertained and taxed before their payment can be adjudged as part of the sentence pronounced by the court. C. J. Laurisch, of Mankato, for appellant.
Clifford L. Hilton, Atty. Gen., Jas. E. Markham, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Chas. E. Phillips, Co. Atty., of Mankato, for the State.
Defendant applied for and was given leave to enter a plea of guilty of the crime of attempting to have carnal knowledge of a girl 16 years old. The court sentenced him to confinement in the county jail of Blue Earth county for the term of four months, ‘and further and in addition thereto * * * to pay the costs taxed by the state in the sum of $299, and that he be confined in the county jail * * * until such costs be paid, not exceeding the term of six months in all.’ Defendant appealed from the judgment. He contends (1) that the court had no power to require the payment of the costs; (2) that, if it had, there has been no taxation of them.
[1] 1. In support of the first contention, it is argued that, if defendant had in fact had carnal knowledge of the girl, the only punishment which could be inflicted was imprisonment in the state prison or county jail (section 8656, G. S. 1913); that the punishment prescribed by section 8490, G. S. 1913, for an attempt to commit the crime is imprisonment for no more than half of the longest term fixed by section 8656; and that the provisions for a fine found in section 8490 can have no application to a crime punishable by imprisonment only, and, finally, that the court had no power to require the payment of costs, because they would be the equivalent of a fine. We think defendant's position cannot be successfully maintained. Section 7988, G. S. 1913, provides that in all criminal actions, upon a conviction, the court may adjudge that defendant pay the whole or part of the disbursements of the prosecution in addition to the penalty prescribed. There is nothing in the language of that section limiting its application to offenses which may be punished by a fine. Moreover, the payment of the state's disbursements is not part of the penalty, but something in addition thereto. The evident purpose of the statute is not the punishment of the offender but the reimbursement of the state. It should be held, however, to refer to such items of disbursements as are properly taxable against a defeated party and not to include those items of expenses connected with the trial which cannot to taxed as disbursements. Board of County Com'rs v. Board of County Com'rs, 84 Minn. 267,84 N. W. 846. We therefore hold that the district court had power to require the payment of the state's disbursements incurred in the prosecution of the defendant.
[2] 2. The judgment refers to the amount defendant was required to pay as ‘the costs taxed by the state.’ If we can look no farther than this statement in the judgment, it would appear, presumptively at least, that the costs had been properly ascertained and taxed. State v. McKinley, 114 Minn. 434, 131 N. W. 369. It is difficult to understand how so large an...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. McCarthy, 37986
...engaged. 6. Under § 631.48, which relates to sentencing of defendants in criminal cases, it has been held by this court (State v. Morehart, 149 Minn. 432, 183 N.W. 960) that court imposing sentence may not require defendant to pay jury fees. Section 610.38, which likewise relates to sentenc......
-
U.S. v. Ross
...with the conclusions concerning taxation of costs there indicated. See, also, U. S. v. Wilson (C.C.) 193 F. 1007; State v. Morehart, 149 Minn. 432, 434, 183 N.W. 960; Board of Com'rs v. Board of Com'rs, 84 Minn. 267, 269, 87 N.W. 846; McLean v. People, 66 Colo. 486, 497, 180 P. 676; Saunder......
-
Arnold v. State
...incident to a prosecution, and not inclusive of any of the expenses of holding required terms of the circuit court.'' In State v. Morehart, 149 Minn. 432, 183 N.W. 960, this statement appears, 'We infer that the bill of disbursements is largely made up of officers' fees for summoning jurors......
-
State v. Jensen
...was indicted for the crime of having carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of 18 years. The same girl was prosecutrix in State v. Morehart, 183 N. W. 960, and State v. Swan, 186 N. W. 581. Defendant was convicted, and appeals from an order denying his motion for a new trial, and, separat......