State v. Meyer

Citations

• 86 Kan. 793
• 122 P. 101
• 1912 Kan. LEXIS 387

Syllabus

<p>syllabus by the court.</p> <p>1. Injunction — Violation—Arrest—Punishment—Contempt. In a proceeding brought under section 4388 of the General Statutes of 1909 to punish a defendant for the violation of an injunction previously granted, wherein he appeared in the district court and defended against the accusation filed against him, the power of the court to try the defendant and to adjudge punishment for a contempt is not affected by the fact that he was arrested under an unwarranted order issued by the probate court, nor was it material, under the circumstances, whether a preliminary order of arrest was issued or an arrest in fact made.</p> <p>2. - Same. In a case where defendant was enjoined from keeping intoxicating liquors in a certain place for sale and from selling them at that place, proof that large quantities of intoxicating liquors were subsequently purchased by defendant, some of which were kept at the place, and that he sold a pint of whisky to a purchaser, is sufficient to uphold a judgment finding defendant guilty of contempt.</p> <p>3. -• Violation — Contempt—Punishment — Judgment. The court found the defendant guilty of contempt and entered judgment that he be committed to the jail of the county for three months and pay a fine of $100. After he had been imprisoned under this judgment for twelve hours he was recalled and the court attempted to render a second or modified judgment sentencing the defendant to six months’ imprisonment and the payment of a fine of $100. Held, that as the first sentence was one the court had authority to impose, and that as the defendant had suffered punishment under it', there was then no authority in the court to change and increase the punishment; and further held, that the first judgment is valid and still enforceable.</p>