Miller v. Hastings Borough

Citations

• 25 Pa. Super. 569
• 1904 Pa. Super. LEXIS 116

Syllabus

<p>Criminal law — Cobts of prosecution — Conclusiveness of judgment — Boroughs — Policemen.</p> <p>Where a jury in acquitting a borough policeman of the charge of assault and battery imposes half of the costs upon him, the judgment entered thereon cannot be attacked collaterally; if such costs are not remitted by the court in which they were imposed, and no appeal is taken to a higher court, the judgment is final and conclusive.</p> <p>Boroughs — Policemen—Action against borough.</p> <p>A borough policeman was arrested and prosecuted for assault and battery. While the suit was pending the borough council in regular session moved “that our police be supported with all that council command in case now pending in court. ” The policeman was acquitted, but the jury imposed upon him one half of the costs. Held, that the motion of council was not a sufficient basis for a suit by the policeman against the borough to recover the costs and his attorney’s fee in the criminal case against him.</p> <p>The borough authorities have no power to expend public money in defense of borough police officers indicted under the law, when the borough itself is not involved.</p> <p>Police officers, in the preservation of the peace, are not agents or servants of a borough, their powers and duties are derived from the state to which their primary responsibility is due, therefore the borough is not liable for their omissions or commissions, malfeasance or non-malfeasance in the per-1 formance of their duties.</p>