Harrell v. City of Dothan

• Decision Date: 19 April 1923
• Docket Number: 4 Div. 54.
• Citation: 209 Ala. 266,96 So. 140
• Parties: HARRELL v. CITY OF DOTHAN.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

96 So. 140

209 Ala. 266

HARRELL v. CITY OF DOTHAN.

4 Div. 54.

Supreme Court of Alabama

April 19, 1923

Appeal from Circuit Court, Houston County; H. A. Pearce, Judge.

John T Harrell was convicted of violating a city ordinance, and he appeals. Transferred from Court of Appeals under Acts 1911 p. 449, § 6. Reversed and remanded.

Espy &amp Hill, of Dothan, for appellant.

Reid &amp Doster, of Dothan, for appellee.

THOMAS J.

Appellant was tried and convicted before the mayor of Dothan for violating the prohibition law-that he "did have in his possession prohibited liquors, or beverages contrary to law, for his own use or for the use of others in the city of Dothan." From judgment of conviction, defendant appealed to the circuit court, was there convicted, fined, and the court imposed an additional sentence of hard labor for the city. From the last judgment of conviction, he appealed to the Court of Appeals.

The court does not take judicial knowledge of the existence of the city ordinance. North Birmingham, etc., Co. v. Calderwood, 89 Ala. 247, 255, 7 So. 360, 18 Am. St. Rep. 105; Barnes v. Common Council of Alexander City, 89 Ala. 602, 7 So. 437; Excelsior Steam Laundry Co. v. Lomax, 166 Ala. 612, 52 So. 347; L. & N. R. R. Co. v. Christian Moerlein Brewing Co., 150 Ala. 390, 43 So. 723; Case v. Mayor of Mobile, 30 Ala. 538; Furhman v. Mayor, etc., of Huntsville, 54 Ala. 263; Sherrod v. State, 14 Ala. App. 57, 71 So. 76; Glenn v. City of Prattville, 14 Ala. App. 621, 622, 71 So. 75. It is only facts generally known which are not required to be pleaded, and of which the courts take judicial knowledge. Moon v. Hines, 205 Ala. 355, 358, 87 So. 603, 13 A. L. R. 1020. The bill of exceptions recites the fact that it contains all the evidence offered at the trial, and, if there was no evidence before the jury that there was an ordinance of the city of Dothan in force at the time, covering the alleged offense for the violation of which defendant was charged, tried, and convicted, the affirmative charge requested by him at the trial should have been given. The subdivisions of the ordinance offered were:

"(3) Unlawful to Buy or Receive Prohibited Liquors.-It shall be unlawful to buy, receive, accept, or procure, within the corporate limits or within the police jurisdiction thereof, or to have in possession for himself or for another or for the joint use of himself and another, or to transport or convey on his person or by any means whatsoever for himself or another, or for the joint benefit of himself and another, within the city of Dothan, or within the police jurisdiction

...