State v. Buker
This text of 64 P. 1118 (State v. Buker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Utah Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The defendant was prosecuted for and convicted of the crime of adultery, and after having been sentenced to the penitentiary, he appealed to this court. The contention of the prisoner here is that the icourt had no jurisdiction to try the case, because the district attorney, instead' of [277]*277the county attorney, filed tbe information, under which he was convicted and sentenced. This contention is tenable. The record shows that the district attorney did file the information. This, that officer had no authority to do, and, therefore, the court acquired no jurisdiction of the cause and its judgment was void. This same question here presented was decided in the case of State v. Beddo, 22 Utah 432, 63 Pac. Rep. 96, and State v. Morrey, 23 Utah 273, decided at the present term, and, on the authority of those cases, this one must be reversed and remanded to the court below, to be disposed of as required by law.
It is so ordered.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
64 P. 1118, 23 Utah 276, 1901 Utah LEXIS 17, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-buker-utah-1901.