Nason v. Staples
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
This was an action of personal replevin. It appeared that the plaintiff, having been tried on a complaint for adultery, before the Municipal Court for the city of Biddeford, that Court ordered him to recognize in the sum of $500 for his appearance before the proper tribunal for trial, which he refusing to do, a mittimus was issued for him to be committed to await his trial.
Read the full summary
This was an action of personal replevin. It appeared that the plaintiff, having been tried on a complaint for adultery, before the Municipal Court for the city of Biddeford, that Court ordered him to recognize in the sum of $500 for his appearance before the proper tribunal for trial, which he refusing to do, a mittimus was issued for him to be committed to await his trial. The defendant, being Marshal of the city, the mittimus was delivered to him, and, in pursuance of its precept, he committed the plaintiff to jail. On trial of this action, the defendant justified by virtue of his said…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was drawn up by
Davis, J.
This case is not analogous to that of State v. Hartwell, 35 Maine, 129. There the mittimus merely-set out *127that the magistrate had reason to suspect the accused to be guilty. Here it is alleged that the accused, upon his hearing, had been “ convicted” of the offence. Though the magistrate had no authority to sentence, he had authority to try the case. He required the accused to plead to the charge; and, upon that plea, after the hearing, he convicted him. “ Conviction” is an adjudication that the accused is guilty. It imports all that the…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Attorney General Ex Rel. O'Hara v. MontgomeryMichigan Supreme Court · 1936
- People v. AdamsMichigan Supreme Court · 1893
- Judge v. PowersSupreme Court of Iowa · 1912
- People v. DavisIllinois Circuit Court · 1901
- Tissot v. DubucletSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1881