State v. Bryant

These cases involve the validity of Senate Bill No. 141, prohibiting “judges from pronouncing, and district attorneys-general from consenting to, any judgment in any criminal case by which the defendant, except when acquitted, is or can he discharged without being required to pay, secure or work out in the workhouse all of the costs, fees and penalties.”

In the case of Costen there was an indictment for embezzlement, and the attorney-general stated to the court when the case was called for trial that he desired to enter a nolle prosequi, because the forms of the indictment were incorrect in…