State ex rel. Coleman v. Trinkle

Citations

• 70 Kan. 396
• 78 P. 854
• 1904 Kan. LEXIS 58

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Office and Officers' — County Attorney — Quo Warranto — Issue. In an action of quo warranto to remove from office a county attorney charged with violating his duty in respect to the enforcement of the prohibitory liquor law the issue of primary importance is that concerning the defendant’s good faith in his official conduct.</p> <p>2. --Presumption of Good Faith — Burden of Proof. Upon the trial of such an action the law presumes that the defendant acted in good faith in all the matters charged against him, and the burden rests upon the state to show otherwise by a preponderance of the evidence.</p> <p>S. -Prohibitory Liquor Law — Duty of County Attorney. A county attorney is not obliged to institute proceedings for the punishment of offenders against the prohibitory liquor law upon his own knowledge; but whenever notified by an officer or other person of any violation of that law it is his duty forthwith to exercise diligently all the authority conferred on him by law for the purpose of disclosing, prosecuting and punishing the offender.</p> <p>4. -Evidence of Violations. Upon the trial of an action of the character referred to in paragraph 1, evidence that saloons were run openly and publicly in the defendant’s county is relevant as bearing upon his motives in dealing with specific offenses of which he had been duly notified.</p> <p>5. -Duty of County Attorney — Evasion. If a county attorney be notified of a violation of the prohibitory liquor law, and be furnished with the names of witnesses by whom the fact of such violation may be established, he cannot unnecessarily delay an investigation of the matter, or a prosecution, if the facts warrant, merely because the city in which the offense .occurred is about to institute, or has instituted, proceedings under its ordinances for punishing the offense. His duties are not dischargeable by the city authorities, and a city prosecution is is not a mere substitute for a prosecution by