State v. Mitchell

Citations

• 3 S.D. 223
• 52 N.W. 1052
• 1892 S.D. LEXIS 62

Syllabus

<p>1. Neither the constitutional provision that “the right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate,” nor that the accused shall be entitled “to meet the Witnesses against him face to face,” has application to summary proceedings to punish for contempt.</p> <p>2. That portion of section 13, c. 101, Laws 1890, which provides that “the affidavits upon which the attachment of contempt issues shah make a prima facie case for the state,” is not unconstitutional, as being an encroachment of the legislative upon the judicial power.</p> <p>3. Neither is such objection valid against the subsequent provision of the same section that “the defendant shall not be entitled to a discharge upon his denial of the facts stated in the moving papers,” as it does not provide that he shall not be discharged, but leaves the whole matter with the court to be judicially determined.</p> <p>4. Whether the law is unconstitutional, in that under it a defendant may be compelled to be a witness against bin: self, is not decided, for it is not claimed that defendant’s rights were so violated, and it is a well-established rule of law that no one can take advantage of the unconstitutionality of any provision of a law who has no interest in, and is not affected by, such provision.</p> <p>5. Motion to strike out certain evidence examined, and the ruling of the court sustained.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.</p>