New Mexico state record. (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1914-19??, 1920-12-10
JUDGE HOLLOMAN HOLDS
GOVERNORS PARDON INVALID

The temporary Injunction. which
was issued lGon t.c district court
Oh November "a, to restrain Fidel
G.tlz. warden OF the penitentiary,
from releasing the sixteen Vilistas
murders who were pardoned by Gov
cinor D. A. Larrazolo. just before
lie governor left to attend pre-
,idents inauguration in the capital
city # his native land, has been
made permanent by Judge Reed
ilo!io'nan. following the hearing on
the case.
Judge Holloman announced he was
not sitisfied whether section 5087 of
tnc codification OF 1915 is valid or
Invalid; that he believed the supreme
court ought to decide whether or
not the state constitution meant for
any restriction to be placed upon
,lc governors right to issue pardons
The appeal to the supreme court
will be expedited as much as possi-
Die, but it is not expected that a
30 days. O. o. Askren, attorney
general. and Harry S. Bowman. as
,istant, appeared for Warden Ortiz !;
Charles {. Calron and Albert II.
Clancy Of the firm of Catron and
Catrou, represented Captain Edward
l. Stafford, who applied for the in
junction on behalf OF the American
legion Bowman said last night that
it would be possible to brief the case
and have it ready to submit, with
the cooperation of the opposing
counsel, within a week. If the appeal
f, perfected in 30 short a time. ap-
plication will be made to the su-
creme court Tor an immediate hear
ing. Justice Herbert +. Reynolds has
gone TO Florida for a vacation and
will not return before some time in
January. II the supreme court de
cides 10 hear the case before the
return OF Jpdge Reynolds, one of
tie district Judges may be called to
sit in his stead.
Owing to the desire of the attor-
ney generals office to have the SUI
pteme court rule on the point as to
whether or not there is any restric-
tion on the governors pardoning
power. he question Of jurisdiction
was not raised. If the judiciary is
III II lllHlllk upon tllE llpIltA anu ptl-
yileges OF the executive. the point
was not raised in the hearing, and
is not likely to be raised on the ap-
peal. It is held to be much more
important to secure a ruling from
the supreme court as to whether or
not the executive has a clear and
unrestricted right to issue pardons.
The main point, Of course, will
hrgc upon the validity OF section
50S7 OF the codification Of 1915. This
&C was passed in 1909, and there
appears TO be little doubt that it wa
then unconstitutional There are
few who hold that since the supreme
court never did construe the act, it
IS not 70 be held invalid On the
other hand, it is above argument that
the governor Of the territory OF New
MeHiro derived his power 20 pardon
lhr0 Eh an act Of congress, and GER
tair'v the legislature Of The territory
had no authority 10 impose rcstric-
'icns upon acts OF congress. The law
ot The territory was incorporated in
TO the cod iication Of 1918. and IL il
was then reenacted, il may become
valid: provided Of course IL comes
within the view or meaning OF the
state constitution which gives the
p1rdou'ug power TO the governor
subject to such regulations as may
he prescribed by law The act of
.. Gb provided that the governor
should not grant a pardon until the
proposed pardon had been approved
or recommended by the board o PEN
i."u'iary commiss oners.
II is the first time in the history
or New Me>ico territory or state.
t'a, tic right OF governor TO is
sue a pardon has been assailcd. There
was no previous act so facrant as
TO Justify action 90 determine the
governors enact rights