Ex parte Roberts

9 Nev. 44
CourtNevada Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 15, 1873
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 9 Nev. 44 (Ex parte Roberts) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ex parte Roberts, 9 Nev. 44 (Neb. 1873).

Opinion

By the Court,

Belknap, J.:

Under a judgment of conviction for prison-breaking, the petitioner was on the 11th day of March, 1872, sentenced to confinement in the State prison for the period of one year, to commence upon the expiration of a term of imprisonment [46]*46which he was then undergoing for robbery. The trial of the robbery case was had out of term, and upon appeal we decided that the judgment of the district court rendered therein was void, and ordered a new trial. (State v. Roberts, 8 Nev. 239.) The petitioner is confined in the State prison. Application is made for his release by writ of habeas corpus, upon the ground that the judgment of the 11th of March, 1872, is void for uncertainty, since it depends upon an impossible condition, or that the sentence thereunder commenced running upon its rendition, and has now expired by limitation.

In behalf of the State, it is contended that the sentence of the 11th of March, 1872, took effect upon the 7th day of May, 1873 — the date of the reversal of the judgment in the robbery case. The decision of this court did not make that judgment void; it was void ab initio, and the sentence and imprisonment under it were, in legal contemplation, nullities. Either the judgment of the 11th of March commenced to run upon its rendition or it is void for uncertainty, and in neither case is the warden of the State prison entitled to the custody of the prisoner. A new trial having been awarded him, he must be remanded to the custody of the sheriff of Washoe County.

It is so ordered.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. Richard H. Harrison, Jr.
2020 WI 35 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2020)
Jackson v. Jones
327 S.E.2d 206 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1985)
Brown v. Commissioner of Correction
147 N.E.2d 782 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1958)
Jablonowski v. State
102 A.2d 56 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1953)
Smith v. Lovell
77 A.2d 575 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1950)
In re Gibbons
1 V.I. 57 (Virgin Islands, 1924)
Ex parte Davis
33 Nev. 309 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1910)
Ex Parte Dela
60 P. 217 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1900)
In re Markuson
64 N.W. 939 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1895)
Ex parte Jackson
96 Mo. 116 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1888)
In re Bloom
53 Mich. 597 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1884)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 Nev. 44, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-roberts-nev-1873.