In re Waring
In re WARING
- Area
- other
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
By the Court:
We have not found, nor has our attention been called by counsel to any provision of' the Penal Code, or of any statutes, which authorizes the judgment of the County Court.
The judgment appealed from is reversed, and the District Court is directed to render a judgment annulling and vacating so much oF’the judgment of the County Court, as is in the following words: “And that judgment for costs, herein taxed at forty dollars, be entered against the prosecuting witnesses for the following reasons: That the complaining witnesses in both cases have acted in bad faith with the court, and that the defendant had fully satisfied the prosecution in each case for the value of the property alleged to have been embezzled, and the prosecuting witnesses had received the same without consulting with the court or district attorney, and had attempted to inflict the costs of the prosecution upon the county.”
Cited by
- Drake v. Russian River Land Co. Civ. No. 512. · 1909-05-25