The Fairmont West Virginian. (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1904-1914, 1910-12-13

Judge Mason to-day refused to grant.
a writ OF habeas corpus in the case Of
the State vs.. Joe Ferrano.
f Ferrano was one of the black hand;
members that was convicted at the.
June term OF 1909.
He was sentenced to one year in
jail and has been in jail ever since he
was sentenced and will have to stay
there seven months longer.
Judge Mason passing on the writ Of
habeas corpus to-day SO decided. The
points In the decision and a history
of the case are given below:
Judge M ason's Decision.
On the ! 9Th day of June. 1909. Joe
Ferrano was convicted OF misde.
meanor In the Circuit Court. He was
sentencedFto pay a fine OF $500 and be
confined In the county. jail for twelve
months. He was placed in Jail on.
the 18th day Of June, 1909, and began
his term Of Imprisonment on that day,
He applied 70 the Supreme Court for
a writ OF error, on the 18th day Of
September. 1909.s q writ of error was.
awarded. The defendant had served
nearly three months Of his term Of
Tinlpris sonment when the writ was
awarded, The Supreme Court did not
decide the case unit the 25th day OF
6etobs when d atIirined the
Judgment Of the Circuit Court In
the meantime the defendant remained
in jail and lis there now. So that
while the defendant was sentenced TO
imprisonment In the county jail for
twelve months only he has been in
jail now .nearly IS months and 1T is
insisted that he must stay there about
seven months longer All depends
upon HIS legal status after the writ of
error, was awarded and before the
Judgment of the Circuit Court was af-
firmed, "a period OF about 13 months.
During all this period he was in jail,
but was he. there receiving punish.
ment inflicted by the Circuit Court,
or was he there awaiting the decision
OF the Supreme Court? Il. .ss.,
H. N. Ogden filed a petition in Cir.
cult Court, in the nature ofsa haheas
corpus, alleging the foregoing facts,
and asking that the defendant be
nov released from jail. which was !; e:
fused. sss ,is
The statute of this State provides
that when a writ OF error. is awarded
by the Supreme. Court IN criminal
case. 1t shall operate as a stay OF pro-
ceedings in the case until the decision
OF the Supreme Court.
Judge Mason held that by the wit
OF error awarded by. the Supreme
Court. the Judgment rendered by him
was, by operation OF the statute, stay
ed A judgment Of Circuit Court in a
Eciyil case is not stayed unless the Su-
ipreme Court also awards a superse-
IDEAS. but he holds there is no need
OF a supersedeas In criminal pro.
Iceeding. The statute gives to a writ
of error in such cases, the force and
effect ola supersedeas. Judge Mason
holds that the prisoner could not have
! been punished under this Judgment
while it was stayed. True, She says,
the prisoner remained in. jail, but he
was there awaiting the decision Of she
Supreme Court. II he had asked to
be admitted TO bail pending the writ
OF error the Circuit Court would have
admitted him to bail. The Circuit
Court conld'not enforce a punishment
under a Judgment which was suspend.
led. When the writ OF error was al.
lowed IT. was the duty Of the Circuit
Court to take the necessary steps TO
have the defendant present to answer
the Supreme Courts decision. This
could be done and by keeping him In
jail or admitting him to bail, but
/ whether or. not bail would be given
3was. a matter for the determination Of
the defendant. The Supreme Court
stopped the enforcement Of sthe Cir.
cult Courts Judgment Now the Su.
lpremc Court has taken Its hands on
and permitted the judgment OF the
Circuit Court to complete its work.
For more than a year the Circuit
Continued on Page Elabt.) I
. --I- - ~