Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1883-08-21
FRANKFORD To BE SENT TO LANCAs
TER.

opinion OF the Court on Motion to suspend
Judgment.
Following is the opinion OF Judge
Futhey, of the West Chester court, deliv-
cred yesterday in tho Frankford case
In the court of oyer and terminer of
Chester county: John Frankford was
convicted in the court of quarter sessions
of Lancaster county of horse stealing and
other larcenies, and on the 22d day Of
September, 1877, was sentenced by that
court to undergo imprisonment by separate
and solitary confinement at labor in the
Lancaster county prison for the period
of nineteen years from that date. He
was duly confined in pursuance of said
sentence in said prison under the charge
Of the keeper thereof, and 80 remained
until the oath day Of May, 1882, when he
escaped therefrom. He was subsequently
arrested in Chester county, charged with
the commission of divers larcenies in the
latter county since his escape, for which he
was held to answer, and for which he has
just been convicted in this court.
The authorities of Lancaster county
now ask that judgment be suspended here
them in order that he may serve out his
kCuO0nCO AKA OA4O PAA0OA Va OAAoe VOAAvys
We are of the opinion that the request
is proper one and should be granted.
The prisoner was convicted and sentenced
there by co ordinate court for offences
committed against the commonwealth,
just as he has now been convicted here for
offences against the same peace and
dignity. The punishment for the COM
mission of crimes, although imposed by
the courts Of the several counties, is in
fiicted under the authority of and for
offences against the state, not for offences
against the counties. Had the defendant
been in confinement in the prison
of this county. instead of Lancaster
county, under sentence, and escaped there
from, and been again arrested and tried
and convicted of other offences, the SEN
tence Of imprisonment imposed by the
court for such offence would be directed
to commence from the expiration of the
previous sentence. We would not in such
case disregard the previous sentence of tho
court, but direct that it be first carried out
and that then the latter sentence commence
to run. On the same principle, the de-
fendant being again in the custody of the
commonwealth, should be required to
servo out his previous sentence in Lancas-
ter county before entering upon that
which the court here would impose.
The fact that the sentences arc those of
tho court of different counties makes no
difference. They should be carried out
just as if the convictions were in the same
county.
If we should now sentence the prisoner
we would in effect nullify the action of the
Lancaster county court, This, comity as
we'll as a regard to the interests of the
commonwealth fOrbids.
We caunot at this time properly pass
judgment upon the prisoner for the often
ces of which he has just been convicted,
inasmuch as our sentence must be to a
different prison from that to which his
just sentence consigns him, and We will
therefore suspend judgment until the
expiration of his term of imprisonment in
the prison of Lancaster county.
1t is ordered that the defendant be de
livered into the custody of the prison of
Lancaster county. and that a detainer be
lodged with the said keeper, SO that, at
the expiration of his term Of Imprisonment
in that county, the said John Frankford
may be again brought before this court to
receive sentence for the offense of which
he has been here committed