State ex rel. Gibson v. Lay
Supreme Court of Missouri
Mandamus. (1) The continuing recognizance, entered into by defendant at the November term, 1893, of the Yernon county circuit court, continued in force until released by a new valid obligation to appear at the Henry county circuit court. (2) Such an obligation has not been given in this case because: First. The sheriff was not authorized to accept a bond, the defendant not being in custody. Second.
Read the full summary
Mandamus. (1) The continuing recognizance, entered into by defendant at the November term, 1893, of the Yernon county circuit court, continued in force until released by a new valid obligation to appear at the Henry county circuit court. (2) Such an obligation has not been given in this case because: First. The sheriff was not authorized to accept a bond, the defendant not being in custody. Second. The bond tendered to the sheriff was conditioned to appear at an impossible date — a day that had already passed, and was hence not a valid obligation. R. S. 1889, sec. 4126; State v. Stone, 106…
1Opinion of the Court
Bubgess, J. —
This is a proceeding by mandamus at the relation of the prosecuting attorney of Yernon county against the defendant as special circuit judge of said county, having jurisdiction of the subject-matter and of the party, to compel him as such judge to order capias for the apprehension of, and to forfeit the recognizance of, one Caldwell who had theretofore, to wit, at the November term, 1893, of said court, been indicted for grand larceny, and had entered into recognizance *612for Ms appearance at the following April term of said court to answer to said indictment, but had made default.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- State v. HopperSupreme Court of Missouri · 1880
- State v. DanielsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1877
- State v. PottsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
- State v. GleasonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1886
- State v. McElhaneyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1886
3Cited by8 opinions
- Chase v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- State v. AustinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1897
- Cunningham v. Current River RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1901
- Searcy v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
- Rooks v. MarksArizona Supreme Court · 1942
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.