Case ID: shan-cas_2/html/0486-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      TuRNEy, Jl,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JNO. DICKSON AND WM. REED.
    Knoxville,
    September Term, 1877.
    1. CRIMINAL LAW. Ignored indictment. Judgment ag-ainst state for costs reviewed by appeal or writ of error only.
    Where tin indictment is ignored by the g-rand jury, and judgment is rendered against the state for the costs including that of the witnesses attending in obedience to summons in pursuance, of an order indorsed on the indictment, a motion will not lie at the next term for judgment against the county for these costs. If such judgment against the state is erroneous, it can only be reviewed by the supreme court upon appeal or writ of error, and it cannot be reviewed upon an appeal from the judgment on such motion refusing- to tax the county with the costs. [Costs upon an ig-nored indictment must be paid by the county now, and not the state. Code, secs. 7619-7622, and notes; also note 1 under sec. 7629.]
    2. COMPTROLLER. Bound by the judgments of the courts.
    The comptroller has no jurisdiction to revise, reverse, or vacate the judgments, orders, or decrees of the courts established by the law of the land, or to disregard or disobey their mandates given in the exercise of their lawful jurisdictions; but his observance and obedience may be compelled by mandamus. [See Code, sec. 7594, prescribing the powers and duties of the comptroller as to bills of costs ag-ainst the state as enacted since this decision.]
   TuRNEy, Jl,

delivered the opinion of the court:

The question presented, arises on the following facts:

At the August term, 1877, of the circuit- court for G-reene county, an indictment was presented to the grand jury against the defendants, for arson, which was ignored. By an order indorsed on the indictment, three witnesses were summoned before the grand jury on behalf of the state. Judgment was rendered for costs, including that of said three witnesses, against the state. The bill of costs, was made out and properly certified to- the comptroller, who refused to allow and order paid the-costs of the three witnesses before the grand jury. At the October term, the attorney-general moved for judgment against the county for these costs, which was refused. ISTo step was taken to vacate the judgment of the former term, nor is there appeal or writ of error therefrom.

If the judgment is erroneous, it can only be reviewed by this court by appeal, or writ of error bringing it directly before us. In the condition of the ease as presented by the record, we cannot inquire into the correctness of the judgment. The state having submitted to it, is bound by it. It was the duty of the comptroller to have issued his warrant for the amount of that judgment. We know of no law conferring upon the comptroller jurisdiction to revise, reverse, or vacate the judgment, orders or decrees of the courts established by the law of the land, or to disregard or disobey their mandates given in the exercise of their lawful jurisdictions. On the contrary, his observance and obedience may be compelled by mandamus.

This case is before us by appeal from the action of the circuit court, refusing to fax Greene county with the costs.

Affirmed.