People v. Bircham
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Eleventh District, County of El Dorado. The facts of this case, as detailed hy the opinion of the Court, are as follows : Bircham entered into a recognizance, with sureties, to appear and answer the charge of manslaughter. Afterwards an indictment was found against him for this offense. On the twenty-ninth of January, 1853, the defendant was called in the District Court, and not appearing, his undertaking was declared forfeited.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Eleventh District, County of El Dorado. The facts of this case, as detailed hy the opinion of the Court, are as follows : Bircham entered into a recognizance, with sureties, to appear and answer the charge of manslaughter. Afterwards an indictment was found against him for this offense. On the twenty-ninth of January, 1853, the defendant was called in the District Court, and not appearing, his undertaking was declared forfeited. Subsequently suit was brought against the defendant and his sureties on this undertaking, and on the sixteenth of May, 1853, judgment rendered by…
1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin, J.
The judgment in this case being the property of the State, could be released by the Legislature in such form and on such conditions as.it chose to prescribe. Whether the Court of Sessions could constitutionally exercise the power of making this release, it is not necessary to inquire, though, if it chose to act in the matter, it is not easy to see why its discharge of a mere ministerial function of this sort would not be valid. But by the statute of 1855, Boards of Supervisors throughout the different counties were constituted, and, by the 25th section of the Act, it is provided that such…
2Cited by4 opinions
- People ex rel. Attorney General v. ProvinesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- Inyo Consol. Water Co. v. JessCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Sparrow v. RhoadesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- City of San Francisco v. BroderickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899