City of Akron v. Mingo

• Decision Date: 01 October 1958
• Citation: 162 N.E.2d 865,108 Ohio App. 570
• Parties: , 10 O.O.2d 59 CITY OF AKRON, Appellee, v. MINGO, Appellant.
• Court: Ohio Court of Appeals

Page 570

108 Ohio App. 570

162 N.E.2d 865, 10 O.O.2d 59

CITY OF AKRON, Appellee, v. MINGO, Appellant.

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Summit County.

Oct. 1, 1958.

Syllabus by the Court.

The provisions of Section 2331.11 of the Revised Code do not grant immunity from arrest to suitors while going to, attending, or returning from, court, for any alleged criminal offense, but pertain only to arrest in civil cases.

Howard L. Calhoun, Akron, for appellant.

John M. Kelly, Director of Law, and Robert W. Blakemore, Akron, for appellee.

STEVENS, Judge.

The stipulation of facts filed herein shows that in February, 1957, defendant was charged with and tried for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. In that trial he was acquitted. While returning to his home in his automobile after that acquittal, he was arrested and charged with failing 'to conform to and proceed in accordance with signal lights, controlling and directing traffic at the intersection of Wabash and W. Cedar, public highways within the city of Akron * * *,' and also that he 'operated a motor vehicle upon the streets of the city of Akron, without having in his immediate possession an unrevoked operator's or chauffeur's license * * *.'

Upon being so charged, defendant claimed that he was immune from arrest under the provisions of Section 2331.11(D), Revised Code, by reason of the fact that he was returning to his home from attending court in a criminal trial, wherein he was the person on trial, and demanded a summary dismissal of both charges.

The trial court denied defendant's demand for a summary dismissal of both charges, and upon trial on the merits found defendant guilty as charged upon both affidavits, and assessed a fine of $5 and costs in each action against defendant.

This appeal on questions of law followed.

Section 2331.11, Revised Code, provides:

'The following persons are privileged from arrest:

* * *

* * *

'(D) * * * suitors, * * * while going to, attending, or returning from court * * *.'

Section 2331.13, Revised Code, provides:

'Sections 2331.11 to 2331.14, inclusive, of the Revised Code do not extend to cases of treason, felony, or breach of the peace * * *.'

In Ohio, arrests are divided into those made in criminal cases and those made in civil cases. See: 5 Ohio Jurisprudence (2d), Arrest, Section 1.

The immunity from arrest set forth in Section 2331.11(D), Revised Code, applies only to civil arrest, while returning from attendance at court. A person in such posture is not immune from criminal arrest. See: 4 American Jurisprudence, Arrest, Section 101.

The Supreme Court of the United States, in Williamson v. United States, 207 U.S. 425, 28 S.Ct. 163, 52 L.Ed. 278, held, as stated in paragraph three of the headnotes:

'3. All criminal offenses are comprehended by the terms 'treason, felony, and breach of the peace,' as used in U. S. Const. Art. 1, s6, cl. 1, excepting these cases from the operation of the privilege from arrest therein conferred upon senators and representatives during their attendance at the sessions of their respective houses, and in going to and returning from the same.'

If the interpretation placed upon the words 'treason,...