The Ocala banner. (Ocala, Marion County, Fla.) 1883-194?, 1906-12-07

board. Discussing conditional par
dons, the supreme court says:
There is undoubtful wisdom in the
policy of comforting upon RESPONSE
bic officers the power to grant 2ddi-
tional pardons by which persons con-
yicted of crime may be encouraged
and pormpted to again become useful
citizens. Should the opportunity there
by offered a convict to reform be not
appreciated and the restraining and
salu;aIy conditions of the pardon be
violated at any time during the con-
vict's life or during the time fixeG
by the pardon for their observance,
the PARDON becomes void and there is
both punishment for the lapse of con-
duct and protection to society in che
exercise of the power given by law
to enforce the unsatisfied portion of
the original sentence.
1.-THE defendant in error accepted the
conditional pardon, thereby securing
his release from imprisonment, and
he is Jound by its legal conditions
and limitations. The provisions of
the pardon are in effect that if at any
time during MS life the defendant in
error SHALL fail to observe its conti'
tions, the Eardon shall be null AMI
void, and he shall be arrested to serve
out the remainder of his sentence of
imprisonment that he has not alreaGv
actually suffered or served. The vio-
laton at any time Of the conditions of
the pardon renders it by its terms
null and voiG ard the status of the de-
| feudant in error is as though he had
never received the conditional pardon.
If, when the conditions Of pardon
are violated, a portion Of the guam
tum of Imprisonment fixed by the SEN
tencc has not been suffered or serv.
ed, lie Earty should be returned to
serve the remainder of his time of
imprisonment, as stipulated in the
terms Of the pardon, and, besides
this, the pardon, by breach of its con-
ditions. is rendeted in law void, az
if the sentence of Imprisonment has
not been fully executed, the law i'm
poses the obligation to complete the
service of Imprisonment fixed in the
| judgment of conviction and sentence
of punishment. The pardon may, as
one of its restrictions, but when the
conditions are violated, the pardon be-
comes void in law and the party is
subject to the unsatisfed portion of
the sentence a sthough no pardon
had been granted
The supreme court therefore enter
ed its judgment that the judgment of
the circuit court, releasing Horne
and holding the order for his arrest
issued by direction of the board of
PAL dCns, be revised, costs to be taxed
against Mr.. Horne, and directing that
the C:!cuit court "do make inquiry
into the truth of the alleged viola
ito, by the defendant in error of the
conditions of his pardon in the man
ner herein pointed out, and if such al
legged violation, of the condition of
such pardon shall be therein estab-
LED to his satisfaction, that the
defendant in error be remanded to
custody and that the remainder Of
the original sentence imposed upon
him, but not suffered, shall be fully
executed; but if the alleged viola
tiors of the conditions of such pardon
shall not be violated he shall be dis
charged from further custody; and
it 10 further ordered that the state at
torIey for the second judicial circuit
shall be notified by the judge of the
said circuit court of the time and
place when and where he will hear
and determine the matter, and that he
cali be given an opportunity to pro-
duce Witnesses to establish, if he can,
the truth of the alleged violation of
the conditions Of the pardon, and that
the defendant in error be accorded
the like privilege Of producing wit
nesses.
The opinion was rendered per GU
RAM, all the judges concurring. Mr.
Horne was represented by Attorneys
W. c. Hodges, Of Tallahassee, and
Z. l.. Clarke, of Monticello, the state
| by Attorney General Ellis.