State ex rel. Brown v. Superior Court

Citations

• 79 Wash. 570

Syllabus

<p>Criminal Law — Sentence—Commutation by Justice — Statutes —Husband and Wife — Offenses—Failure to Support. 3 Rem. & Bal. Code, § 5933-2, of the “lazy husband” act, authorizing the court to change its order from time to time, in case the defendant is required to pay a weekly sum to his wife for her support, under subd. 2 of the act, has no application to the provisions for punishment by confinement in the county jail at hard labor, under subd. 3 of the act; and hence does not authorize the justice to commute a sentence once imposed under subd. 3.</p> <p>Same — Sentence — Commutation by Justice — Statutes—“Sentence” and “Conviction” — Husband and Wife — Failure to Support —Offenses. Subd. 3 of 3 Rem. & Bal. Code, § 5933-2, containing the expressions “where conviction is had and sentence to imprisonment imposed,” “where such conviction is had during the time of such sentence,” “where conviction and sentence is had” and “where ruch work is performed by persons under sentence,” clearly indicates an intent to make a distinction between “conviction” and “sentence,” so that the words “after conviction” as used in subd. 2, authorizing a judgment of weekly payments to the wife, means before sentence; and the statute empowering the justice to (1) impose a fine, (2) require payments to the wife, or (3) sentence the 'defendant to the county jail, judgment in any of the three alternatives is final, and precludes the justice from subsequently commuting a sentence of imprisonment.</p>