Show HABEAS CORPUS DENIED in the matter of the application of C M nokes f for or release from the penitentiary under the benefit of the act allowing prisoners a deduction of time for good behavior the territorial supreme court I 1 feb eb 2 rendered the following decision in the Sup supreme rente court of the territory of 0 utah january term 1889 ex parte chas chaa M nokes on petition for writ of habeas corpus pus foreman boreman justice delivered the opinion of the court this is an application for a writ of habeas corpus and for a discharge thereon from prison by consent the whole matter is heard upon the application for the writ the facts stated in the petition being admitted as true by the district attorney the f petitioner charles M nokes was on the day of october 1888 sentenced by the district court to imprisonment in the pe penitentiary for the term of eighty five days and to pay afine a fine of the eighty five days would if there were no deductions expire on the alth of january 1889 but the petitioner claims that he is entitled to deduc eions at the rate of five days per mouth month if this were correct the term of sentence would have expired on the of december 1888 and the time which the law requires that he should be imprisoned solely for nonpayment non payment of the fine of would begin to run on the day of december 1888 and it being thirty days would expire on the day of january 1888 on the of january 1889 the petitioner under provisions of the statute U S rev bev st sees 1042 and applied to TJ 8 commissioner norrell for his discharge f from ro in prison ason and showing that his beh behavior amor in the penitentiary was good 00 d that he was unable to pay the ane fine that he had no property to the amount of 20 over and above that which is exempt from execution and claiming that he had served his term of sentence and the thirty days additional after hearing comm combus Is lioner norrell denied the application for discharge from lva prison 1 lo 10 n thereupon the petitioner has s applied to this court on the writ of habeas corpus whether he is entitled to his discharge or not depends upon whether his case comes within the purview of the statute as to deductions for good behavior that statute 2 comp laws of 1888 p reads as follows sec 2 each convict sentenced for any period less than life who has not been guilty of a breach of the rules of discipline of the prison shall be entitled to a reduction of the period of sentence as hereinafter provided etc cc sec 3 the following deductions shall be allowed to convicts for good conduct from the term of sentence of three months fifteen days from a term of six months thirty days from a term of one year two calendar months and then follows a detail of the amounts of deductions for greater terms of sentence see sec 4 in all terms of sentence terminating intermediately between the terms hereinbefore specified the deductions shall bo be proportionate I 1 to those named in the F foregoing 0 section the section first quoted declares that each convict shall be entitled to a reduction of the period of sentience sentence as hereinafter provided ro 11 the next section does doea not provat provide e for a reduction IOa where the perio i of sentence la Is less than three months and the subsequent section provides f for r reductions only in terms of seu sentence terminating intermediately between those terms hereinbefore specified 11 As there is no reduction provided in any prior section where the term of imprisonment is less esa than three months the sentence imposed upon the petitioner could not have been a sentence terminating mina ting intermediately between those nose terms hereinbefore specified 11 1 and d therefore not coming within the provision of the statute if we could apply the spirit of the statute to w the case the petitioner could be discharged but we are bound by oe language of the statute it being plain plein and unambiguous he the case of the petitioner does not come within tae the statute and he is not en titled eato to his discharge he is re to the custody of the marshal marshai sandford C J henderson J and judd J concur |