State v. Superior Court In and For Walla Walla County

• Citation: 13 P.2d 1086,169 Wash. 292
• Decision Date: 16 August 1932
• Docket Number: 24014.
• Parties: STATE ex rel. SCAGGS v. SUPERIOR COURT IN AND FOR WALLA WALLA COUNTY et al.
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Washington

13 P.2d 1086

169 Wash. 292

STATE ex rel. SCAGGS v. SUPERIOR COURT IN AND FOR WALLA WALLA COUNTY et al.

No. 24014.

Supreme Court of Washington

August 16, 1932

Department 2.

Original proceedings by the State, on the relation of Cecil Scaggs for a writ of review directed to the Superior Court of the State of Washington in and for Walla Walla County, the Honorable John L. Sharpstein, Judge, and others.

Proceedings dismissed.

W. G Coleman, of Walla Walla, for plaintiff.

John H Dunbar and John A. Homer, both of Olympia, R. M. Burgunder, of Seattle, and Bertil E. Johnson and Hilton B. Gardner, both of Tacoma, for defendant.

BEALS J.

During the month of December, 1920, Cecil Scaggs, on his plea of guilty to an information charging him with murder in the second degree filed in the superior court for Pierce county, was sentenced to confinement in the state penitentiary at Walla Walla for not less than thirty years nor more than fifty years. He was received at the prison December 30, 1920, since which time he has been confined therein. After serving eleven years and three months of his sentence, Scaggs applied for a parole. His application was denied, the prison board ruling that he was not eligible for parole until he had served the minimum sentence fixed by the court. Thereafter, claiming that under the law he was eligible for parole, Scaggs filed in the superior court for Walla Walla county his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, naming as respondents the warden of the state penitentiary and the members of the parole board of the Washington state penitentiary. Prior to the hearing on the writ, the prosecuting attorney of Pierce county intervened in the proceeding, and the prosecuting attorney of King county appeared and participated in the argument as amicus curiae. The matter was submitted to the superior court upon the pleadings; the court ruling, as matter of law, that Scaggs was entitled to no relief.

Upon the denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, this proceeding was instituted on relation of Cecil Scaggs, who filed herein his petition for a writ of review, seeking to bring Before this court for review the record of the proceedings Before the superior court for Walla Walla county. An order to show cause was issued, in response to which the defendants appeared and demurred to the petition upon the ground that the same fails to state facts sufficient to entitle relator to the relief prayed for, or to any relief. All the pertinent facts appear upon the face of the record.

No question is raised as to the procedure followed by Mr. Scaggs, either in the superior court or in this court, in order to present the question which he desires to have judicially determined, and we have considered and will determine the issues as presented. We also assume without deciding that Mr. Scaggs was entitled to present his case to the superior court for Walla Walla county by way of an application for a writ of habeas corpus, no contention to the contrary being urged by any of the parties to the proceeding.

It is contended on behalf of Mr. Scaggs that under section 2393, Rem. Comp. Stat., defining murder in the second degree, the statutory minimum sentence to be imposed upon one convicted of that crime is ten years, and that so much of the sentence which he is serving as fixes a minimum in excess of ten years is void. This contention is based upon the following portion of the section referred to: 'Murder in the second degree shall be punished by imprisonment in the state penitentiary for not less than ten years.'

In connection with the section of the statute above referred to, plaintiff relies upon sections 2281 and 2282, Rem. Comp. Stat., which read as follows:

'§ 2281. Whenever any person shall be convicted of any felony for which no fixed period of confinement is imposed by law, the court shall, in addition to any fine or forfeiture which he may impose, direct that such person be confined in the state penitentiary, or in the Washington state reformatory, as the case may be, for a term not less than the minimum nor greater than the maximum term of imprisonment prescribed by law for the offense of which such person shall be convicted; and where no minimum term of imprisonment is prescribed by law, the court shall fix the same in his discretion at not less than six months nor more than five years; and where no maximum term of imprisonment is prescribed by law, the court shall fix such maximum term of imprisonment.'

'§ 2282. The state board of control, acting in conjunction with the warden of the state penitentiary, or the board of managers of the Washington state reformatory, acting in conjunction with the superintendent of such reformatory, as the case may be, may at any time after the expiration of the minimum term of imprisonment for which such prisoner was committed thereto, direct that any prisoner confined in such institution shall be released on parole upon such terms and conditions as in their judgment they may prescribe in each case.'

Other crimes, for example, arson, robbery, burglary in the first degree, assault in the first degree, etc., are punishable, under the statute, by confinement in the state penitentiary for not less than certain minimum terms of years fixed in the statute, just as the crime of murder in the second degree is punishable. The question is whether, under such a statute, one convicted of a crime so punishable may be sentenced to confinement in the state penitentiary for a minimum term of years greater than the minimum named in the statute.

Under the statutes as the same existed prior to 1907, trial courts generally speaking, were authorized to impose sentences for definite terms of years within the minimum and maximum limits prescribed by law. This court very generally refused to review the terms of imprisonment fixed by the superior courts. State v. Burton, 27 Wash. 528, 67 P. 1097; State v. Van Waters, 36 Wash. 358, 78 P. 897; State v. Patchen, 37 Wash. 24, 79 P. 479. In 1907 the Legislature enacted a law covering the matter of sentences to confinement in the state penitentiary (Laws 1907, c. 155, p. 341), and at the same session passed an act relating to sentences to and confinement in the state reformatory (Laws 1907, c. 167, p. 385). By section 1, c. 155, p. 341, Laws 1907, it was provided that the superior court should not fix the limit or duration of the sentence, the period of...