Atwood v. Atwater
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error to the district court for Saline county. Tried below before Morris, J. There must first be proof of corpus delicti,.and second, proof connecting the defendant therewith. [In re Balcom, 12 Neb., 317; In re Carleton, 11 Id., 99; Ex parte Barker, Id., 309.) The police judge, therefore, had no power to commit to jail.
Read the full summary
Error to the district court for Saline county. Tried below before Morris, J. There must first be proof of corpus delicti,.and second, proof connecting the defendant therewith. [In re Balcom, 12 Neb., 317; In re Carleton, 11 Id., 99; Ex parte Barker, Id., 309.) The police judge, therefore, had no power to commit to jail. (Horr & Bemis on Municipal Police Ordinances, p. 4, sec. 3.) Plaintiff in error is entitled to relief by habeas corpus. [Ex parte Maulé, 19 Neb., 273.) Every fact necessary to sustain a judgment of the court will, on review, be presumed to have been proven, unless the contrary…
1Opinion of the Court
Maxwell, Ch. J.
On the 29th day of July, 1889, Jesse Atwood, a citizen of Crete, was charged by J. J. Atwater, marshal of said city, before W. T. Buchanan, police judge, with violating city ordinance by keeping and harboring a bitch'dog without having first obtained license therefor. Atwood was arrested on a warrant issued on said complaint and was condemned to pay a fine of $2 and costs, in default of which said police judge issued a mittimus ordering his imprisonment in the city jail of said city, there to remain until discharged in due course of law, on which Atwood was actually confined in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Stansell v. CorningMichigan Supreme Court · 1870
3Cited by7 opinions
- In re Van ScieverNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
- Gillard v. ClarkNebraska Supreme Court · 1920
- Atwood v. AtwaterNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
- Selicow v. DunnNebraska Supreme Court · 1916
- Wangsness v. McAlpineSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1922
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.