State v. Wentler

• Decision Date: 20 May 1890
• Citation: 76 Wis. 89,45 N.W. 816
• Parties: STATE v. WENTLER.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

76 Wis. 89

45 N.W. 816

STATE

v.WENTLER.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

May 20, 1890.

On motion to certify allowance of attorney's fee.

For prior report, see 44 N. W. Rep. 841.C. E. Estabrook, Atty. Gen., and L. K. Luse, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

J. F. Lyon & Son, for defendant.

PER CURIAM.

The defendant was tried for a criminal offense in the circuit court of Walworth county, and convicted. The trial court thereupon certified certain questions of law to this court for determination, pursuant to the statute. Rev. St. § 4721. J. F. Lyon, Esq., was duly appointed by the circuit court to defend the accused, and argued the questions so certified in this court. He now moves this court to certify to a reasonable compensation for his services therein, founding his motion upon Rev. St. § 4713. The section is as follows: “Whenever, in a criminal action or proceeding, any attorney or counselor shall defend the person charged with any offense, by order of the court, on the ground that the accused is destitute of the means to employ counsel, the county in which such criminal action or proceeding may arise, or shall be pending, shall only be liable to pay such attorney or counselor for his services, such sum as the court in which such services shall be performed shall, by an order to be entered in the minutes thereof, certify to be a reasonable compensation therefor, and which sum shall in no case exceed fifteen dollars per day for each day actually occupied in such trial or proceeding.”

It was said in State v. Williamson, 72 Wis. 61, 39 N. W. Rep. 135, that the practice, which had been pursued by this court in a few instances, of appointing counsel to prosecute writs of error, had long been abandoned; and it was held that the appointment of an attorney by the trial court to defend the accused was sufficient authority for such attorney to prosecute a writ of error here. The same rule is applicable when questions of law are certified to this court. The case of Dickerson v. State, 48 Wis. 288, 4 N. W. Rep. 321, which came here in 1879 on writ of error, is one of the cases in which counsel was appointed by this court to prosecute the writ. After the case was disposed of, the counsel thus appointed, A. Hyatt Smith, Esq., applied to this court to certify to his reasonable compensation for his services. The application was denied, but no opinion was filed. We denied the application on the ground that the statute above quoted referred to the court...