discussing parole power generally; citing authorities with approval
How later courts described this case
- discussing parole power generally; citing authorities with approval
- describing the legislative changes
- “When a court suspends the pronouncement of sentence, the judicial process has not been completed. It remains in a state of suspense[.]”
Written by the judges who cited it.
Distinguished
Distinguished by State v. Theisen, 167 Ohio St. (N.S.) 119 (1957)
The Varner case, although suggesting that this court might consider the probationary procedure in the same light as parole, so far as termination thereof is concerned, recognizes in its quotation from In re Anderson, 191 Ore., 409, 229 P. (2d), 633, that the granting and termination of probation are clearly distinguishable from the granting and revoking of parole.
The opinion
On Petition for Rehearing
BRAND, C. J.
The petition for rehearing is denied. Our original opinion is fortified by the following decisions: Ander *453 son v. Corall, 263 US 193 , 68 L Ed 247 ; Biddle v. Asher, 295 F 670; Jones v. Clemmer, 163 F 2d 852 ; Fuller v. State, 122 Ala 32, 26 S 146; Commonwealth ex rel v. Minor, 195 Ky 103, 241 SW 856 ; Jacobs v. Crawford, 308 Mo 302, 272 SW 931 ; Commonwealth v. Polsgrove, 231 Ky 750, 22 SW 2d 126 ; Argon v. State, 123 Tex Cr Rep. 151, 58 SW 2d 108 ; Pearson v. Hollowell, 47 SD 458 , 199 NW 165 ; Ex parte Millert, 144 Kan 745, 220 P 509 ; 39 Am Jur, Pardon, Reprieve and Amnesty, § 94, p. 578; People v. Ragen, 396 Ill 554, 72 NE 2d 311 .