Court Opinion

ID: 9730644
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 15:19:13.08269+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:26:08.195784
License: Public Domain

Dissenting Opinion
Draper, J.
I concur in Judge Bobbitt’s well reasoned dissenting opinion, and wish to add a few words.
The majority opinion seems to hold that the trial court lost jurisdiction because the matter was held under advisement something over eleven months, and it orders the entry of a judgment for the appellant, who had been found guilty of first degree burglary and sentenced to a term of ten to twenty years. In so deciding the court has, in my opinion, created a problem more serious than any it may have put at rest.
It occurs to me to wonder just when the trial court lost jurisdiction. Was it a few days, weeks or months after the cause was taken under advisement? I think this question has now become one of great importance in the administration of the criminal laws of this state.
Without any reference whatever to Eule 1-13, which I thought was designed and adopted to take care of situations such as we have here, the court says, in effect, that if trial courts hold cases under advisement too long, they lose jurisdiction. I think trial courts are *414entitled to know how long is too long. Some yardstick should be furnished whereby they can make this important measurement. If such is not done, I fear that trial courts all over the state will find themselves extending these “judicial pardons” without knowing they are doing so.
I am afraid that the legendary sword which the court has removed from over the heads of culprits now dangles over the heads of our trial judges.
Note. — Reported in 120 N. E. 2d 165.