Gentle v. City of Huntsville, 8 Div. 60

• Decision Date: 19 March 1935
• Docket Number: 8 Div. 60
• Citation: 160 So. 273,26 Ala.App. 374
• Parties: GENTLE v. CITY OF HUNTSVILLE.
• Court: Alabama Court of Appeals

160 So. 273

26 Ala.App. 374

GENTLE v. CITY OF HUNTSVILLE.

8 Div. 60

Court of Appeals of Alabama

March 19, 1935

Appeal from Circuit Court, Madison County; Paul Speake, Judge.

Louis Gentle was convicted of violating an ordinance of the city of Huntsville in the city court. From a Judgment of conviction in the circuit court where the case was tried de novo on appeal from the judgment of the city court, defendant appeals.

Judgment of the circuit court affirmed.

No question was presented on appeal from prosecution under ordinance in absence of assignment of errors, notwithstanding statute requiring appellate courts to consider all questions in criminal cases apparent on record or reserved by bill of exceptions, since prosecutions under ordinances are quasi criminal and on appeal are subject to rules governing civil appeals (Code 1923, § 3258).

E. C. Boswell, of geneva, for appellant.

Thos. E. Knight, Jr., of Montgomery, for the state.

BRICKEN, Presiding Judge.

The prosecution in this case originated in the city court of Huntsville, and was for the violation of a certain ordinance of said city. From a judgment of conviction in said city court, the defendant appealed to the circuit court, where the case was tried de novo and resulted in his being again convicted. From the judgment of conviction in the circuit court, this appeal was taken. However, no question is presented for our consideration as no assignment of error is made as the law requires.

Prosecutions under city ordinances are quasi criminal and on appeal to the courts of last resort are subject to rules governing civil appeals. Section 3258 of the Code 1923, which requires the appellate courts to consider all questions apparent on the record, or reserved by bill of exceptions, applies only to criminal cases, and has no application to an appeal of this character. We must therefore affirm the judgment of the circuit court, from which this appeal was taken, for want of assignment of errors.

Affirmed.