In re Johnson

Michigan Supreme Court

In re Johnson

62 N.W. 407, 104 Mich. 343

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 12, 1895

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 62 N.W. 407 (In re Johnson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Johnson, 62 N.W. 407, 104 Mich. 343 (Mich. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This is an application for a writ of habeas corpus. The return shows that a fine of 8200 and 850 costs were imposed upon the petitioner, and it was ordered that in default of payment he should be committed to the Detroit House of Correction until the fine and costs should be paid, not exceeding 90 days. This time •has not expired.

It is contended that the costs should have been taxed by the clerk; but the common practice — in criminal cases the better practice — is for the court to determine the •amount of costs which the respondent will bé required to pay, and state the amount in the judgment. The proceeding is necessarily summary. The alternative is given to the respondent to pay the judgment forthwith, and it would be impossible in such . cases to delay the taxing of costs until notice is given and a proceeding had before the clerk.

The judgment appears regular upon its face, and there is nothing to show that the costs imposed were more than were in fact incurred in the prosecution.

Under these circumstances, we think the judgment cannot be attacked collaterally, and the prisoner will be remanded.

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

Per Curiam.

This is an application for a writ of habeas corpus. The return shows that a fine of 8200 and 850 costs were imposed upon the petitioner, and it was ordered that in default of payment he should be committed to the Detroit House of Correction until the fine and costs should be paid, not exceeding 90 days. This time •has not expired.

It is contended that the costs should have been taxed by the clerk; but the common practice — in criminal cases the better practice — is for the court to determine the •amount of costs which the respondent will bé required to pay, and state the amount in the judgment. The proceeding is necessarily summary. The alternative is given to the respondent to pay the judgment forthwith, and it would be impossible in such . cases to delay the taxing of costs until notice is given and a proceeding had before the clerk.

The judgment appears regular upon its face, and there is nothing to show that the costs imposed were more than were in fact incurred in the prosecution.

Under these circumstances, we think the judgment cannot be attacked collaterally, and the prisoner will be remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

62 N.W. 407, 104 Mich. 343, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-johnson-mich-1895.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack