Estep v. Lacy
Cases that cite this one
11 later published cases cite this decision.
- Xenia v. Smith (Ohio Ct. App. 1941)
- City of Toledo v. Bader (Ohio Ct. App. 1937)
- Campion v. Gillan (Neb. 1907)
- Olds v. Forrester (Iowa 1905)
- Ex Parte Mann (Tex. Crim. App. 1898)
- State v. Mateer (Iowa 1898)
- Spellings v. State (Tenn. 1897)
- In re Dobson (Neb. 1893)
- In re Boyd (Kan. 1886)
- Albertson v. Kriechbaum (Iowa 1884)
- State v. . Mooney (N.C. 1876)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Upon tbe trial tbe fact that plaintiff bad received a full and unqualified pardon was proved, and it was admitted that defendant was entitled to a judgment, unless plaintiff was discharged from tbe payment of tbe costs in question by tbe pardon of tbe governor. In our opinion tbe court below ruled rightly. Although tbe costs follow tbe conviction as a necessary incident, yet they constitute a fund distinct from tbe fine, and are eventually due tbe witnesses and tbe various officers of tbe law.
They are not affected by a general pardon • discharging a convict from a fine and judgment of imprisonment. Upon this point see tbe following: County of Schuylkill v. Rufsnider, 46 Penn. 446; State v. McO'Blenis, 21 Mo. 272; Holliday v. The People, 6 Gill. 214; State v. Farley, 8 Blackf. 229; Ex parte McDonald, 2 Wharf. 440.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.