Harrod v. Dismore

26 N.E. 1072, 127 Ind. 338, 1891 Ind. LEXIS 209
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 10, 1891
DocketNo. 14,853
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 26 N.E. 1072 (Harrod v. Dismore) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Harrod v. Dismore, 26 N.E. 1072, 127 Ind. 338, 1891 Ind. LEXIS 209 (Ind. 1891).

Opinion

Elliott, J.

The appellant seeks by his complaint to enjoin the collection of a judgment rendered against him for violating the statute prohibiting the obstruction of public ditches.

The contention of counsel is that the statute requires that the defendant in such a prosecution shall be fined ten dollars, and that, as the fine imposed was only five dollars, the judgment is void. This contention can not prevail. The court had general jurisdiction of the subject, and its judgment, even if erroneous, can not be collaterally assailed. The error complained of would not avail in a direct attack, since the imposition of a less fine than the law requires in a case where the only punishment is a fine, is not prejudicial to the defendant. Nichols v. State, post, p. 406.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Mates v. State
165 N.E. 316 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1929)
Hunnicutt v. Frauhiger
158 N.E. 572 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1927)
Peters v. Koepke
59 N.E. 33 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1901)
Ballard v. City of Chicago
69 Ill. App. 638 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1897)
State v. Arnold
42 N.E. 1095 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1896)
Turner v. Conkey
17 L.R.A. 509 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1892)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
26 N.E. 1072, 127 Ind. 338, 1891 Ind. LEXIS 209, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harrod-v-dismore-ind-1891.