| Show JUDGE ZANES ZONES DECISION 4 tiie MOTION TO ADMIT CLAWSON TO BAIL IT is known to our readers that the arguments on the motion to admit rudger clawson to bail pending spending his appeal to the supreme court of the territory from the judgment of the district court concluded last evening and that judge zane while that it was in the discretion of the court to so release him refused to do so but committed him to the Per penitentiary ilten Follow following ln Is the f full ull text of the judges ruling which could not be obtained last evening owing to the lateness of the hour wh when enIC enit etwas w as delivered counsel for the defendant have entered a motion for the admission of the defendant to bail ball after sentence has ha been made to the section of the criminal practice act ol of 1878 which reads as follows 66 an appeal to the supreme court fr from oin oln a judgment upon tiling filing with the clerk of thu court in which lre ige the Co conviction livie was had a certificate of the judge ot of such court or of a justice of 0 thel tho supreme eme court that in his opinion there is probable cause for the appeal but hot not otherwise also reference has been made to the sec see which provides if the certificate provided for in the preceding section gertio n is filed the sheriff must if the defendant be in his custody upon bein being served with a copy thereof keep the defendant in his custody without executing the judgment and detain 1 him I to abide the also aiso judgment on appeal reference ference Ee is also aiso made to section which is after conviction of an offense not punishable with death A defendant who has ap appealed p baled may be admitted to ball bail first farst As a matter of right when the appeal is from a I 1 judgment Imp imposing I 1 atine afine a nine fine only second As a matter of discretion in all other cases this section first provides that he shall be admitted to bail as a matter ot of right when the appeal is from a judgment imposing a line only and as a matter of discretion in its all other cases then section wa items 5 and 6 provide pi 0 vide in case the discretion be exercised how liow it shall be done this la Is about all there is in reference to it these provisions of df the statute NV when ken hen taken together give give the court a discretion to a dmit admit persons to bail who have been been gentene sentenced ed to imprisonment reference has been made to a number of decisions among othel s the sixtieth barbour the court here read from th the e case and stated that it did not appear what all the provisions of the statute were I 1 have been referred to a number of cases in california and one of them at least seems to be a decision of the supreme court of that state the practice had beery beely it seems enthat in that state slate to admit persons to bail after judgement jud gement 11 pending an appeal where there was a certificate of probable cause but the legislature adopted a section afterwards which is I 1 belleve believe in the very language of the statute of utah upon the same subject i as I 1 have read them the court avs davs in ex parte john J marks t 49 cal cai 6 s 0 I 1 reading from the syllabus th the e r rule ruie u 1 laid down in hoges case 48 cal 5 in relation to admitting a prisoner to ball bail after his conviction and pending tin an appeal has been modified by section 1243 1213 of the penal code under the provisions of said sald section ball bail should not be allowed except by a judge of the court in which conviction was had bad or by a justice of the supreme court and then only when circumstances cum stances of an extraordinary character have intervened that case has been followed since that decision was made I 1 believe in all the cases which have teen geen been referred to I 1 the statute would seem to indicate that it was the intention of the legislature thattie that the court should admit a party art arx to ba bail ball I 1 where the sentence was to imprisonment as a matter of discretion lon in all cases except m arder if the he court is to exercise its discretion in admitting aparto a party to bail bati it would seem that there must roust be something upon which the court has to exercise that discretion the court does doea not admit to ballin ball in its discretion unless there are aie facts or circumstances upon which it can base that discretion I 1 am of the opinion that it would not be a correct rule ruie rule ruie 0 of practice under this statute to admit all persons to bail who might choose to take an appeal in good faith there should be ome borge reason for it and of course the rule applied la in wa 01 case cast must be a general one As there are no reasons shown applicable to all cases I 1 am of the opinion that the party Is not entitled to ball bail unless there is some reason shown chown why he lle should be this seems to be the rule established by the weight of 0 authority the statute of california califor hila fila Is substantially the same as that ot of utah and the supreme court of that state has so construed it and construed it before it was adopted by the legislature of utah in respect to the practice in this territory I 1 have inquired of judge twiss and he says that application was never made to him but once and that was before the judgment was rendered and he suspended su d judgment but he did not admit the pari pahi party to bail never admitted any one to ball bali after judgment judge emerson states that the question has never been raised before him I 1 do not know what the practice has been in this district but I 1 am of the opinion that the proper rule is that the defendant must be ordered into custody unless some extraordinary circumstance is shown authorizing the court in its discretion to admit him to bail the order will be made |
