26 Mont. 365 | Mont. | 1902
delivered tbe opinion of tbe court.
Application for a writ of habeas corpus and for certiorari in aid thereof. Tbe complainants were adjudged guilty of a contempt, committed by tbe violation of a restraining order issued by tbe district court of Silver Bow county in a cause therein pending, in which Celestia Nixon is plaintiff, and tbe petitioner Boyle and others are defendants. They were sentenced to pay fines, and, in default of payment, were committed to- tbe county jail, to be confined until tbe fines should be satisfied under tbe provisions of Section.2224 of tbe Penal Code. Complainants allege that their imprisonment is illegal, for tbe reason that the evidence adduced at tbe bearing did not tend to show that they bad violated tbe order in question, and that tbe judgment of conviction, based upon a finding thereon, adverse to the defendants, is unauthorized and void. Both writs were issued, and tbe record was certified up.
Upon consideration of tbe question raised by the petition, we have reached tbe conclusion that we have no power, in. this proceeding, to look into tbe evidence adduced by tbe parties, and to determine therefrom whether tbe district court erred in its action thereon. It bad jurisdiction of tbe subject-matter of tbe action wherein tbe restraining order was issued, and of tbe parties thereto. It also regularly acquired jurisdiction of the complainants. They were arrested under an attachment regularly issued, upon affidavit by tbe plaintiff setting forth tbe facts constituting tbe violation of tbe restraining order. Tbe court beard tbe evidence, and -made its finding thereon. Tbe finding is conclusive upon this court in this proceeding, and we cannot interfere, even though it be conceded that there was no evidence to support it. The writ of habeas corpus may not be used to correct errors in proceedings which are within tbe jurisdiction of tbe-trial court; nor may we, upon certiorari issued in aid thereof, go further than to ascertain that tbe court bad jurisdiction of tbe subject-matter of tbe controversy and
Many other questions were raised by counsel at the hearing, but they do not fall within the purview of the present applicar tion, and it is not necessary to consider and determine them.
The writs are accordingly quashed and set aside, the proceeding is dismissed, and the complainants are remanded to the custody of the sheriff of Silver Bow county.
Dismissed.
On Motion to Tax Costs.
ME. CIIIEP JUSTICE BRANTLY delivered the opinion of the court.
Motion to tax costs. This was an original application to this court for a writ of habeas corpus, and for certiorari in aid
It is said by counsel for .defendants that the item in controversy should be allowed for the reason that it was incurred by defendants under circumstances similar to
The motion is therefore overruled.