City of Birmingham v. Williams, 6 Div. 597.
| Decision Date | 26 June 1934 |
| Docket Number | 6 Div. 597. |
| Citation | 155 So. 877,229 Ala. 101 |
| Parties | CITY OF BIRMINGHAM v. WILLIAMS. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Questions certified by Court of Appeals.
Questions certified by the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court, under Code 1923, § 7322.
Questions answered.
The constitutional guaranty, "That no person shall, for the same offense, be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb," has generally been construed to protect a person once tried in a court of competent jurisdiction, and there acquitted of any criminal offense, felony, or misdemeanor, from being again tried for the same offense under the law of the same sovereignty.
The genius and spirit of American institutions is said to lead to this liberal construction of this constitutional provision.
With this view the decisions of this court are in full accord. Jackson v. State, 136 Ala. 96, 33 So. 888; Hurst v. State, 86 Ala. 604, 6 So. 120, 11 Am. St. Rep. 79; Ex parte Lange, 18 Wall. 163, 21 L.Ed. 872; 16 C.J. p. 235, § 362.
In some states this is expressly held to include offenses against city ordinances. Noland v. People, 33 Colo. 322, 80 P. 887; City of Portland v. Erickson, 39 Or. 1, 62 P. 753; City of St. Paul v. Stamm, 106 Minn. 81, 118 N.W. 154.
In the view we take, it is not necessary to decide this question.
For present purposes, it may be conceded that, if a person is tried before the recorder for an offense under a city ordinance and acquitted, he may not be again arrested and tried for the same offense.
It may be further conceded that, where the right of appeal to the circuit court is a necessary procedure in order to protect the constitutional right of trial by jury, an acquittal on such appeal would be final. The citizen could not be required to surrender one constitutional right in order to preserve another.
But it is fully settled with us that the constitutional right of trial by jury does not extend to trials under city ordinances. Costello v. Feagin, Judge, 162 Ala. 191 50 So. 134; Ex parte State ex rel. City of Birmingham, 164 Ala. 576, 51 So. 309.
The right of appeal to the circuit court and trial by jury on such appeal are therefore purely statutory.
In such case we think a different principle governs.
The party has already been duly convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction. The statute gives her a right of appeal and trial de novo to vacate such conviction. It is competent for the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Birmingham v. Evans, 3 Div. 224
...right of appeal to the circuit court and trial by jury on such appeal are purely statutory. Ex parte Hall, supra; City of Birmingham v. Williams, 229 Ala. 101, 155 So. 877; Donahey v. City of Montgomery, 43 Ala.App. 20, 178 So.2d The mere fact that a city ordinance makes reference to a stat......
-
Donahey v. City of Montgomery
...right of appeal to the circuit court from recorders court and trial by jury on such appeal are purely statutory. City of Birmingham v. Williams, 229 Ala. 101, 155 So. 877. Section 587, Title 37, Code 1940, provides for appeals from recorder's court to the circuit court and for trial by jury......
-
Hudson v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, In and For Clark County
...v. Romich, 67 Idaho 229, 176 P.2d 204, 210 (1946); Miller v. Winstead, 75 Idaho 262, 270 P.2d 1010, 1012 (1954); City of Birmingham v. Williams, 229 Ala. 101, 155 So. 877; 26 Ala.App. 200, 155 So. 878 This state has not heretofore passed on the question. In State ex rel. Callahan v. Second ......
-
City of Birmingham v. Williams
...but, on appeal to the circuit court, he was acquitted, and the City of Birmingham appeals. Affirmed. Certified questions answered in 155 So. 877. W. J. Wynn and Ralph E. Parker, both Birmingham, for appellant. Dan Trawick, Jr., of Birmingham, for appellee. RICE, Judge. This is an appeal by ......