|
|
Freeman v. United States, 217 U.S. 539 (1910)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Freeman v. United States, 217 U.S. 539 (1910)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 217 U.S. 524, click here.
Freeman v. United States No. 156 Submitted April 11, 1910 Decided May 16, 1910 217 U.S. 539
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT
OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS
Syllabus
Provisions carried into the Philippine bill of rights by the statute of July 1, 1902, c. 1369, 32 Stat. 691, such as "that no person hall be imprisoned for debt," are to be interpreted and enforced according to their well known meaning at the time. Kepner v. United States, 195 U.S. 100.
Statutes relieving from imprisonment for debt, as generally interpreted, relate to commitment of debtors for liability on contracts, and not to enforcement of penal statutes providing for payment of money as a penalty for commission of an offense and the provision against imprisonment for debt in the Philippine bill of rights as continued in § 5 of the Act of July 1, 1902, c. 1369, 3 Stat. 61.
The fact that a money penalty imposed for embezzlement goes to the creditor and not into the public treasury does not make imprisonment for nonpayment of the penalty imprisonment for debt, and so held as to § 5, Art. 535, of the Penal Code of the Philippine Islands.
Where the statute provides a penalty for embezzlement to the amount proved, to go to the creditor, and a subsidiary sentence of imprisonment in case of nonpayment, the court may, without violating fundamental principles of justice, find the amount wrongfully converted for the purpose of fixing sentence in the criminal action, leaving the creditor his remedy in a civil action for any excess due him over the amount of the sentence, and so held as to a conviction for embezzlement under Article 535 of the Penal Code of the Philippine Islands.
The facts, which involve the validity of a conviction for embezzlement under § 535 of the Philippine Code, are stated in the opinion.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Freeman v. United States, 217 U.S. 539 (1910) in 217 U.S. 539 217 U.S. 540. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=U3VKR8YCXKAK7CV.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Freeman v. United States, 217 U.S. 539 (1910), in 217 U.S. 539, page 217 U.S. 540. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=U3VKR8YCXKAK7CV.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Freeman v. United States, 217 U.S. 539 (1910). cited in 1910, 217 U.S. 539, pp.217 U.S. 540. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=U3VKR8YCXKAK7CV.
|