State v. Summers

Nevada Supreme Court

State v. Summers

9 Nev. 269

CourtNevada Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 15, 1874

DocketNo. 1

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 9 Nev. 269 (State v. Summers) 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

State v. Summers, 9 Nev. 269 (Neb. 1874).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court,

Whitman, C. J.:

The only point in this appeal is that the judgment is void, because therein a date is fixed for the execution of a sentence of death, more than sixty days from the time of judgment, contrary to the criminal statute. It is needless to inquire what effect, if any, such a mistake would have upon a judgment which might properly include such an order; as by the statute of the State of Nevada it is the warrant and not the judgment which fixes the time for executing sentence of death. Stats. 1861, 484, Sec. 454. People v. Bonilla, 38 Cal. 699. So it follows that the language objected to in the judgment was mere surplusage, which may and should be disregarded, and that the court may at any time issue its warrant in due form of law. Stats. 1861, 485, Secs. 466-467. People v. Bonilla, 38 Cal. 699.

Let the judgment be modified by striking therefrom all matter relating to the time of execution; and let a remittitur issue immediately.

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

By the Court,

Whitman, C. J.:

The only point in this appeal is that the judgment is void, because therein a date is fixed for the execution of a sentence of death, more than sixty days from the time of judgment, contrary to the criminal statute. It is needless to inquire what effect, if any, such a mistake would have upon a judgment which might properly include such an order; as by the statute of the State of Nevada it is the warrant and not the judgment which fixes the time for executing sentence of death. Stats. 1861, 484, Sec. 454. People v. Bonilla, 38 Cal. 699. So it follows that the language objected to in the judgment was mere surplusage, which may and should be disregarded, and that the court may at any time issue its warrant in due form of law. Stats. 1861, 485, Secs. 466-467. People v. Bonilla, 38 Cal. 699.

Let the judgment be modified by striking therefrom all matter relating to the time of execution; and let a remittitur issue immediately.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 Nev. 269, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-summers-nev-1874.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack