Ex Parte Pierce
| Decision Date | 03 October 1934 |
| Docket Number | No. 16845.,16845. |
| Parties | Ex parte PIERCE. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from County Court at Law, No. 2, Harris County; Ray Scruggs, Judge.
Habeas corpus proceeding by Bob Pierce, who was convicted and fined $5 for violation of an ordinance of the city of Houston.
Relator discharged.
See, also, 69 S.W.(2d) 119.
Arthur J. Mandell, of Houston, for appellant.
H. G. Tigner, Asst. Cr. Dist. Atty., of Houston, and Lloyd W. Davidson, State's Atty., of Austin, for the State.
Relator was convicted in the county court at law No. 2 of Harris county, Tex., and fined $5 upon a complaint charging that within the city limits of said city of Houston, relator gave and handed to persons upon the public streets of said city "bills of paper and advertising matter," contrary to an ordinance of said city. Examining the ordinance, a copy of which we find in the record, we find that part of same in terms forbids that any person shall give or hand bills of paper or other advertising matter to any person passing through or on the streets, etc., of said city. That part of said ordinance so forbidding seems to us in part meaningless and in part unreasonable. We have examined many dictionaries, legal and otherwise, also Words & Phrases and other available legal works which might be supposed to shed light, without finding in any of them any definition of, or reference to, or description of "bills of paper"; and confess our own ignorance as to what is meant by such expression. We must conclude that it conveyed no notice or knowledge to relator.
Turning to the other act charged in said complaint and forbidden in said ordinance, it would appear clearly unreasonable to punish any person for handing to another on the street of a city a newspaper or other harmless or legitimate document which might have in it advertising matter. Words might be multiplied, but volumes could not make plainer that this is an unwarranted invasion of the rights of the citizen guaranteed by our Constitutions—State and Federal. This is the extent of relator's wrongdoing as charged in the complaint whose invalidity as a proper or sufficient pleading, under our law and Constitution, is the sole question before this court in this habeas corpus proceeding. The authority of the city of Houston to forbid throwing or scattering paper or papers of any character in any manner on the streets or other places in said city is not raised or passed on. The testimony further than as same may be looked to as affording us ground...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Chrestensen v. Valentine, 358.
...527, 13 O.L.A. 265; In re Thornburg, 55 Ohio App. 229, 9 N.E.2d 516; Ex parte Johns, 129 Tex.Cr.R. 487, 88 S.W.2d 709; Ex parte Pierce, 127 Tex.Cr.R. 35, 75 S.W.2d 264. Thus a rather impressive array of judicial precedents is put aside, once we accept the assumptions urged upon Perhaps we c......
-
DeBremaecker v. Short
...as it prohibited the distribution of non-commercial handbills, by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals in 1934. Ex parte Pierce, 1934, 127 Tex.Cr.R. 35, 75 S.W.2d 264 (no writ history). The City of Houston contends, in essence, that the appellants were littering the streets and thereby endan......
-
Chrestensen v. Valentine
...73 Mich. 288, 41 N.W. 275, 2 L.R.A. 721, 16 Am.St.Rep. 578; City of Chicago v. Schultz, 341 Ill. 208, 173 N.E. 276; Ex parte Pierce, 127 Tex.Cr.R. 35, 75 S.W.2d 264. It is argued on behalf of defendant that the plaintiff has sought to manufacture a case which, under the cloak of civil liber......
-
Marney v. State, 31291
...of Houston unconstitutional which prohibited the handing of advertising matter to another on the street, this Court, in Ex parte Pierce, 127 Tex.Cr.R. 35, 75 S.W.2d 264, said: 'Words might be multiplied, but volumes could not make plainer that this is an unwarranted invasion of the rights o......