White v. State
| Decision Date | 13 July 1915 |
| Docket Number | 4602. |
| Citation | 150 P. 716,50 Okla. 97 |
| Parties | WHITE ET AL. v. STATE. |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
Where an application for change of judge is not made until after the jury is impaneled, and fails to show why it was not presented sooner, and in addition such application only states the conclusion that the judge is biased and prejudiced, but states no facts from which such bias or prejudice can be gathered, held, no error to refuse the change of judge.
The statute of limitations does not run against the state, unless expressly so provided by statute.
Where an action is brought on an appearance bond, and the defendants by verified answer deny the execution of the bond but in the same answer allege that the bond was signed by them for the purpose of releasing the principal from an illegal arrest, held, the admission of the bond in evidence without proof of its execution, if error at all, is harmless error under the provisions of Rev. Laws 1910, § 6005.
Where objection is made to the introduction of evidence, which is sustained, counsel should state in the record what they expect to show by the witness; otherwise this court cannot see that any error was committed, as the answer to the question may be immaterial, or even helpful to the other side.
Where it appears that a person charged with selling whisky failed to appear when the case was called, whereupon the court issued an alias warrant and required $500 additional bond and the officer arrested the defendant in a town distant from the county seat, and the defendant gave the bond, in suit conditioned for his appearance on a day certain, which bond was executed before a notary public, but afterwards approved by the county court, and upon giving such bond the prisoner was released, but afterwards failed to appear, and the bond was forfeited, held, the bondsmen are liable.
Commissioners' Opinion, Division No. 2. Error from County Court, Seminole County; T. S. Cobb, Judge.
Action by the State against W. J. White and others. Judgment for the State, and defendants bring error. Affirmed.
An application for change of judge for bias, stating no facts and filed after the jury is impaneled, is properly denied.
This was an action on an appearance bond in the usual form, conditioned that, whereas, W. J. White stands charged in the county court of Seminole county with the crime of selling whisky, that if the said W. J. White shall appear before said court on the 8th day of October, 1909, and there remain from day to day and term to term, until discharged by due course of law, the obligation to be void; otherwise to remain in full force and effect. This bond was signed by all the plaintiffs in error, and the justification was sworn to before a notary public, but the bond bears this indorsement:
"The foregoing bond approved this 11th day of October, 1909.
This bond was made an exhibit to the petition. The answer is verified, and is a general denial; also, denies that W. J. White was charged with the crime of selling whisky; denies that he was legally held in custody on October 8th, or any other time to answer said charges; denies that White or the sureties ever executed an appearance bond as required by law, as set out in the petition; denies that White was ever in custody legally on said charge; denies that any order was ever made by the county court requiring White to make bond for his appearance; and denies that any legal appearance bond was at any time made by the defendants for the appearance of White. The answer further denies that any legal complaint or information was ever filed in the county court of Seminole county against White for the offense, or that any warrant for his arrest was ever legally issued, or that White was ever legally in custody. The answer further denies that White was ever called on or required to make his appearance in the county court of Seminole county, or that the sureties were ever called on or required to produce the body of said White. The answer also pleads the statute of limitation. An amended answer, also verified, was filed, containing substantially the matters above set out, and, in addition, that the defendant was unlawfully arrested in Sasakwa, Seminole county, upon a purported warrant, and was coerced by the officers serving it to make the bond sued on. This answer then contains this allegation:
"Defendants further allege that the defendant, W. J. White, was taken as a prisoner, unlawfully detained, before G. L. Benson, a notary public, within and for Seminole county; that the notary public then and there prepared the bond herein sued on and requested the defendant, W. J. White, and the other defendants herein, to sign and execute said bond in order to secure the release and discharge from arrest of the defendant, W. J. White; that the purported bail bond was taken before the said G. L. Benson, as notary public, without authority of law; and that the said defendant, W. J. White, was then and there discharged and released from such arrest by the said G. L. Benson, as such notary public."
An unverified reply was filed to this answer. The state introduced the record in the criminal case against White, which showed a warrant of arrest directed against him, dated October 8, 1909, and duly returned, showing the arrest of White on the same day, and that the officers had his body before the court. The state also introduced, as a part of the files in the case, the appearance bond sued on, which was admitted over the objection of the defendant, and the state also proved the signature of the county judge approving the bond to be genuine. The state also introduced the following record from the county court:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial