Court Opinion

ID: 9705665
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 01:15:24.561468+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:22:13.319781
License: Public Domain

Concurring Opinion by
Ervin, P. J.:
I agree with the decision reached by the majority but desire to add one comment. The District Attorney, in his brief, “argues” that the result of the order is that there is no distinction in penalties between two impecunious defendants, one of whom shot and killed *383only one deer and tbe other who shot and killed fifty. This is not correct. The release under the Insolvency Act only discharges the defendant from physical confinement. It does not affect the fines, which remain as a liability and may be collected from his after acquired assets. For a thorough discussion of the whole subject, see In re Fines, Costs and Forfeited Recognizances, 3 Lyc. 1 (1950).