City of Lebanon v. Gordon

Decision Date03 March 1903
Citation73 S.W. 222,99 Mo. App. 277
PartiesCITY OF LEBANON v. GORDON.
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

Appeal from Circuit Court, Laclede County; Leigh B. Woodside, Judge.

William Gordon was prosecuted in the police court of the city of Lebanon for the offenses of drunkenness and disturbance of the peace, and from a judgment for the accused, entered on quashing the complaint, the city appeals. Reversed.

The plaintiff filed the following complaint before John A. Pond, police judge of the city of Lebanon, a city of the fourth class, to wit:

"The City of Lebanon, Missouri, Plaintiff, v. William Gordon, Defendant. John Curn, being duly sworn, on oath states that William Gordon, on or about the 27th day of July, 1901, and within the corporate limits of the said city of Lebanon, did then and there unlawfully and willfully violate sections Nos. 1 and 28 of Ordinance No. 172, entitled and concerning misdemeanors, by then and there violating section 1 of said Ordinance 172, by then and there being drunk and intoxicated upon the streets and public places of the said city of Lebanon, Missouri. This affiant further states that the said William Gordon on the said date, and within the said corporate limits of the said city of Lebanon, Missouri, did then and there unlawfully and willfully violate section 28 of said Ordinance 172, by then and there disturbing the peace of a neighborhood of said city of Lebanon by loud and unusual noise, and by loud, offensive, and indecent conversation, and by threatening and by quarreling and by challenging. This affiant further states that the said neighborhood was near the principal business part of the said city, being on and near Commercial street, in said city, and near the block in which the post office is situated and kept—contrary to said ordinance made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the said city of Lebanon. [Signed] John Curn."

"John Curn makes oath and says that the facts and allegations contained in the foregoing complaint are true, according to the best knowledge, information, and belief of affiant. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 16th day of August, 1901. J. A. Pond, Police Judge City of Lebanon, Mo."

A trial was had before the justice, resulting in a conviction and a fine of $1, from which defendant appealed to the circuit court. After the cause reached the circuit court, defendant moved the court to quash the complaint, assigning the following grounds therefor: "First. Because the defendant is prosecuted upon a criminal information for a misdemeanor before a police judge, and a city of the fourth class has no authority to institute criminal proceedings or prosecute a person for a criminal offense. Second. Because the defendant is accused in said complaint with being intoxicated or drunk, and drunkenness is not an offense, except as defined by the statute,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Meredith v. Whillock
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • July 28, 1913
    ... ... conviction. State v. Blitz, 171 Mo. 539. (4) A ... proceeding under a city ordinance is a civil and not "a ... criminal" proceeding. City of Marshall v. Geo. W ... v. Hartman, 45 Mo.App. 647; Grocer v. Targart, ... 78 Mo.App. 166; Gordon v. Miller, 111 Mo.App. 342; ... Stewart v. v. Watson, 133 Mo.App. 47; Shoffner v ... Fink, ... State law is no bar to a prosecution for the same offense by ... a city. [City of Lebanon v. Gordon, 99 Mo.App. 277, ... 73 S.W. 222.] The fact that an offense is a misdemeanor under ... ...
  • City of Carthage v. Block
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • December 6, 1909
    ...class, has the power under the general welfare clause of its charter to enact the ordinance in question. R. S. 1899, sec. 5834; Lebanon v. Gordon, 99 Mo.App. 277; Green City Holsinger, 76 Mo.App. 567; St. Louis v. Schoenbusch, 95 Mo. 618; St. Louis v. Bentz, 11 Mo. 61; St. Louis v. Cafferat......
  • Davenport Vinegar & Pickling Works v. Shelley
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • May 8, 1917
    ...The statute does not require that the notice state the date of the judgment. In Monroe v. Herrington, supra, 99 Mo. App. loc. cit. 293, 73 S. W. 222, it is "The purpose of the statute, in requiring notice of an appeal from a justice's court taken subsequent to the day on which the judgment ......
  • State v. Jackson
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • May 17, 1949
    ...overruled the plea in bar. State v. Gustin, 152 Mo. 108, 53 S.W. 421; State v. Muir, 164 Mo. 610, 65 S.W. 285; City of Lebanon v. Gordon, 99 Mo.App. 277, 73 S.W. 222; City of Stanberry v. O'Neal, 166 Mo. App. 709, 150 S.W. It is asserted by further assignment of error that defendant's demur......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT