State v. Parmeter

• Decision Date: 23 May 1908
• Citation: 49 Wash. 435,95 P. 1012
• Parties: STATE v. PARMETER.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

95 P. 1012

49 Wash. 435

STATE v. PARMETER.

Supreme Court of Washington

May 23, 1908

Appeal from Superior Court, Chehalis County; Mason Irwin, Judge.

Glen Parmeter was convicted of a violation of a city ordinance and appealed to the superior court. From an order sustaining a motion to dismiss the cause for failure to prosecute, the state appeals. Reversed and remanded, with instructions to reinstate and proceed with the trial.

Marquis & Shields and R. E. Taggart, for the State.

J. C Cross and A. Emerson, for respondent.

CROW J.

This action, which is a prosecution of Glen Parmeter for the violation of an ordinance of the city of Aberdeen, was originally commenced in the city police court, where, upon trial before a jury, the defendant was convicted and fined. On July 18, 1907, he appealed to the superior court for Chehalis county, and upon filing an appeal bond was discharged from custody. On September 21, 1907, the defendant served and filed in the superior court an application for the dismissal of the action, on the ground that more than 60 days had elapsed since the taking of his appeal and that the trial of the cause had not been postponed on his application. This motion being sustained, judgment was entered discharging the defendant, exonerating the sureties on his appeal bond, and taxing the costs against the city of Aberdeen. The plaintiff has appealed.

This action, prosecuted for the violation of a city ordinance although conducted in the name of the state of Washington was commenced in the police court of the city of Aberdeen, which had original jurisdiction. In that court the respondent was promptly tried and convicted. He appealed, and now contends that he was entitled to be discharged, and to a dismissal of the action by the superior court, under section 6911, Ballinger's Ann. Codes & St. (section 1531, Pierce's Code) reading as follows: 'If a defendant indicted or informed against for an offense, whose trial has not been postponed upon his application, be not brought to trial within sixty days after the indictment is found or the information filed, the court must order it to be dismissed, unless good cause to the contrary be shown.' The Bill of Rights of the state Constitution (article, 1, § 22) provides that in criminal prosecutions the accused shall have the right to a speedy trial; and section 6911, Ballinger's Ann. Codes & St., supra, was enacted for the purpose of enforcing such right. The respondent has already been awarded a speedy trial before a jury in the court of original jurisdiction. His appeal removed the cause to the superior court, and was taken for the sole purpose of obtaining another trial and securing his discharge, if acquitted. Under these circumstances he should at least have demanded such trial in the superior court before seeking a dismissal and discharge under the statute. Section 912, Ballinger's Ann. Codes & St. (section 3467, Pierce's Code), provides that appeals from the police court to the superior court may be taken as an appeal is taken from a justice's court; and sections 6763, 6764, Ballinger's Ann. Codes & St. (sections 3082, 3083, Pierce's Code), define the method of taking such appeals in criminal actions. The former section by express terms provides that the bond to be given by the appellant shall be conditioned that he will appear in the...