168 S.W.2d 1039 | Mo. | 1943
This is an appeal by defendants in a proceeding brought under the Declaratory Judgments Act to obtain a decree declaratory of the rights of plaintiff (respondent) with respect to the taxing and payment of an item of criminal costs. The facts are not in dispute, and the case turns on the construction to be given certain criminal costs statutes. [1040] The parties will be referred to as they were styled in the trial court.
The facts are these: One Butts was convicted in Division #8 of the Jackson Circuit Court of a capital offense. He was sentenced to the extreme penalty, in accordance with the verdict, and appealed. Plaintiff, as the official reporter of said court, in obedience to an order made under Section 13344,1 furnished Butts a transcript of *739
the testimony for the purposes of said appeal. Division II of this court reversed said conviction, and remanded the case for new trial. [State v. Butts,
The circuit clerk taxed the costs of said transcript against the state, and issued a fee bill for said single item. It was examined by the prosecuting attorney and judge, found to be correct, and certified to the State Auditor for payment. The State Auditor refused to approve said fee bill, and to draw a warrant for the same for the reason said criminal case had not been determined within the meaning of Section 4236.2 The trial court held, among other things that the state is liable for said transcript fee, and that it became the duty of the auditor, upon presentation of the fee bill, to forthwith draw a warrant for the payment of the same.
[1] "At common law costs as such in a criminal case were unknown. As a consequence it is the rule as well in criminal as in civil cases that the recovery and allowance of costs rests entirely on statutory provisions — that no right to or liability for costs exists in the absence of statutory authorization. Such statutes are penal in their nature, and are to be strictly construed." [20 C.J.S. p. 677.]
[2] Sections 42213 and 42224 impose liability for costs (except those incurred on the part of defendant) on the state or county, respectively, on conviction of an indigent defendant under the particular circumstances enumerated in said sections. Where the defendant is acquitted, liability for costs is imposed under the formula prescribed by Section 4223.5 *740
[3] It is not contended that the provision of Section 13344, that the "court reporter's fee for making the same [transcript]shall be taxed against the state or county as may be proper," (Emphasis ours) which is found in Chapter 94 in relation to court reporters, authorizes a judgment, as for costs, against either the state or county as of the time the order is made. A fair construction requires us to hold that the [1041] language means said fee is to be taxed as costs, in the same manner as other costs are taxed, but with ultimate liability for the same on the state or county as may be proper under the general statutes in relation to criminal costs. Being thus relegated to the general statutes, it is apparent the provision of Section 13344 casting liability for such transcript on "the state or county as may be proper" cannot be reconciled with Sections 4221 and 4222, both of which expressly provide that neither the state nor county shall pay such costs "as were incurred on the part of defendant." Section 13344, being the later enacted statute, must be held to have repealed, by necessary implication, the contrary provisions of Sections 4221 and 4222, to the extent noted.
[4] This brings us to the primary contention of plaintiff, viz.: That notwithstanding Butts' appeal, the judgment of conviction and pronouncement of sentence by the trial court, "determined" said case, within the meaning of Section 4236, supra, so as to render the costs payable, and that by virtue of Sections 13344 and 4221 the state is liable therefor, because the conviction was for a capital offense. The trial court so held.
Referring to Section 4236, supra, it will be seen that it is the duty of the clerk to tax the costs and issue fee bills in criminal cases when the same "shall have been determined or continued generally." The verb determine "has been variously defined, the three principal senses being to ascertain, to bound, and to terminate." [26 C.J.S. pp. 1257-1258.] "To put or set an end to; to bring to a close; to terminate." [Webster's International Dict.] In Hanchett Bond Co. v. Glore,
[5] Other questions are raised but in view of the disposition being made of the case they need not be decided, except this: The two-year statute of limitations [Section 13038 R.S. '39, providing, "Persons having claims against the state shall exhibit the same, with the evidence in support thereof, to the auditor, to be audited, settled and allowed, within two years after such claims shall accrue, and not thereafter."] does not begin to run against criminal costs taxable against the state until such costs shall have accrued; and it is apparent they do not accrue, within the meaning of the statute, until the final determination of the case.
As the Butts case stands today, the defendant therein has not been convicted so as to make either the state or county liable for the costs under Sections 4221 and 4222, nor has he been acquitted so as to make Section 4223 apply. It follows that the decree must be reversed, and the cause remanded with directions to enter a decree in conformity with the views herein expressed. It is so ordered. All concur except Gantt, J., absent.