Dugan v. State of Ohio, 766
| Decision Date | 14 May 1928 |
| Docket Number | No. 766,766 |
| Citation | 72 L.Ed. 784,48 S.Ct. 439,277 U.S. 61 |
| Parties | DUGAN v. STATE OF OHIO |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Messrs. F. L. Johnson, of Xenia, Ohio, and Robert F. Cogswell, of Washington, D. C., for plaintiff in error.
Mr. Joseph A. Finney, of Xenia, Ohio, for the State of Ohio.
M. J. Dugan was convicted before the mayor's court of the city of Xenia, Greene county, Ohio, for the unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor under section 6212-15 of the General Code of Ohio. The conviction was sustained by the common pleas court of Greene county, Ohio, by the Court of Appeals of the same county, and by the Supreme Court of the state (159 N. E. 477). The defendant has duly raised the question of the constitutional impartiality of the mayor to try the case. This is the only issue for our consideration. The objection is based on the ground that for the mayor to act in this case was a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution, in that the mayor occupied in the city government two practically and seriously inconsistent positions, one partisan and the other judicial; that as such mayor he had power under the law to convict persons without a jury of the offense of the possession of intoxicating liquor and punish them by substantial fines, half of which were paid into the city treasury, and as a member of the city commission he had a right to vote on the appropriation and the spending of city funds; and further that, while he received only a fixed salary and did not receive any fees, yet all the fees taxed and collected under his convictions were paid into the city treasury and were contributions to a general fund out of which his salary as mayor was payable.
The defendant in February, 1924, pleaded guilty and was fined $400 for possessing intoxicating liquor, and thereafter was convicted and fined $1,000 for a subsequent similar offense. This is a review of the second conviction.
The city of Xenia is a charter city, and has a commission form of goverment, with five commissioners. The charter provides that a member of the city commission shall also be mayor. The mayor has no executive, and exercises only judicial, functions. The commission exercises all the legislative power of the city, and together with the manager exercises all its executive powers. The manager is the active executive. The mayor's salary is fixed by the votes of the members of the commission other than the mayor, he having no vote therein. He receives no fees. The offense charged here was committed within the corporate limits of the city of Xenia. Xenia is the capital of Greene county, having, according to the census of 1920, a population of 9,110. Greene county is a rural county, with no larger city than Xenia.
Was the mayor disqualified as judge by the Fourteenth Amendment, as interpreted and applied in Tumey v. State of Ohio, 273 U. S. 510, 47 S. Ct. 437, 71 L. Ed. 749, 50 A. L. R. 1243? We think not. The Tumey Case does not apply to this. Tumey was arrested and charged with unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor at White Oak, a village in Hamilton county, Ohio, on a warrant issued by the mayor of North College Hill. The latter was a village of 1,100 in the county, which included the city of Cincinnati with half a million population. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Doolin Sec. Sav. Bank, F.S.B. v. F.D.I.C.
...impartially adjudicate claims for benefits and supervise funds out of which benefits are paid). But see Dugan v. Ohio, 277 U.S. 61, 65, 48 S.Ct. 439, 440, 72 L.Ed. 784 (1928) (rejecting similar due process challenge to conviction obtained in mayor's court because mayor had very limited exec......
-
Borchert, Application of
...Ohio law and the Washington law authorized by our state constitution, the Tumey case is not controlling. See Dugan v. State of Ohio, 1928, 277 U.S. 61, 48 S.Ct. 439, 72 L.Ed. 784; Bevan v. Krieger, 1933, 289 U.S. 459, 53 S.Ct. 661, 77 L.Ed. We conclude that RCW 3.16.070 is not violative of ......
-
State ex rel. Moats v. Janco
...Williams and Osborne cases and the fee of the justice involved in this case is, as indicated in the quotation from Dugan v. Ohio, 277 U.S. 61, 48 S.Ct. 439, 72 L.Ed. 784 in the opinion in the Williams case, that the justice (there the mayor) 'receives his salary in any event, whether he con......
-
Blackwelder v. Safnauer
...it and rejected another due process challenge to a conviction obtained in Ohio's so-called "Mayor's Courts." Dugan v. Ohio, 277 U.S. 61, 48 S.Ct. 439, 72 L.Ed. 784 (1928). In Dugan, the mayor was a salaried official who did not receive any portion of the fines levied as costs for hearing th......
-
The Federal Circuit Holds That The Structure Of The PTAB Is Constitutional
...finances and the fines paid by convicted defendants provided a substantial portion of the village's funds. Id. 3 In Dugan v. Ohio, 277 U.S. 61 (1928) the Supreme Court found that the mayor's court did not violate due process because the mayor did not have "an impermissible financial interes......
-
The Federal Circuit Holds That The Structure Of The PTAB Is Constitutional
...finances and the fines paid by convicted defendants provided a substantial portion of the village's funds. Id. 3 In Dugan v. Ohio, 277 U.S. 61 (1928) the Supreme Court found that the mayor's court did not violate due process because the mayor did not have "an impermissible financial interes......