Opinion ID: 2172304
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: absence of mittimus

Text: At the time the petitioner surrendered himself to the Sheriff on the afternoon of July 7th there was not in existence any written order of commitment or mittimus and none was prepared by the committing Justice until after petitioner had been released on bail pending his hearing on habeas corpus. Petitioner takes nothing by this point. There was no loss of jurisdiction by the Court. The record shows the Judge orally ordered the commitment and the order was correctly carried out. It is the judgment of the court which authorizes detention. The mittimus is the evidence of the officer's authority.    The judgment is the real thing, the precept is not. The important question on habeas corpus is: Is the prisoner in the custody where the judgment commanded him to be put? and not how he was taken into custody. Wallace v. White, 115 Me. 513, 521, 99 A. 452, 455 (1916). See also Stern v. Chandler, supra.