Laur v. State
| Citation | 126 S.W. 840,94 Ark. 178 |
| Parties | LAUR v. STATE |
| Decision Date | 28 February 1910 |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Arkansas Circuit Court; Eugene Lankford, Judge affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
C. M Brice, for appellant.
1. Defendant having been tried for an offense in the mayor's court, it was error to place him on trial for a distinct offense in the circuit court on appeal. 53 Ark. 368; 63 Id. 307; 77 Id. 234; 84 Id. 352; 4 A. & E. Ann. Cas. 1.
2. There is no testimony to support the verdict of conviction.
3. A cost bond being necessary to give jurisdiction to the mayor's court, the circuit court acquired none on appeal. 84 Ark. 352; § 2476 Kirby's Dig.
Hal L Norwood, Attorney General, and Pettit & Pettit, for appellee.
1. Appellant's offense was properly tried as a violation of a State statute. 68 Ark. 247; 86 Id. 442; 88 Id. 210.
2. The circuit court had jurisdiction, and the cost bond was properly filed in that court on appeal, without objection by appellant. 2 Ark. 332; 3 Id. 474; 5 Id. 703; 37 Id. 405; 49 Id. 143; 11 Cyc. 187.
3. The undisputed evidence sustains the verdict of conviction.
J. W. Allen made affidavit before H. D. Sebree, mayor of the town of Almyra, in Arkansas County, that C. T. Laur had committed a breach of the peace within the corporate limits of said town by cursing him and threatening to fight. Laur was duly arrested and brought before the mayor for trial. He made a motion that Allen be required to give a bond for costs, which was overruled by the mayor. Laur was tried and convicted. He appealed to the circuit court, where he renewed his motion for a bond for costs. His motion was sustained, and Allen filed a cost bond. Laur was tried and found guilty before a jury, his punishment being assessed at a fine of $ 25. From the judgment rendered upon the verdict he has appealed to this court.
Counsel for appellant assigns as error the action of the court in regard to the cost bond. Appellant renewed his motion in the circuit court to require the prosecuting witness to give a bond for costs. His motion was sustained, and the bond was filed. The ruling of the circuit judge was right because there was a trial de novo in the circuit court, and the case should not have been dismissed for any mistake of law or irregularity committed in the mayor's court. This is in accord with the practice suggested in Mann v. State, 37 Ark. 405.
Again, counsel for appellant objects that the ordinance under which Laur was tried in the mayor's court was invalid. As we have already seen, the trial in the circuit court was a trial de novo, and, the crime for which he was arrested being a violation of the criminal laws of the State, appellant was properly tried and convicted thereunder. This has been expressly decided in the following cases: Barnett v. Malvern, 92 Ark. 483; Walker v. Fayetteville, 93 Ark. 443, 125 S.W. 412; McCall v. Helena, 86 Ark. 442, 111 S.W. 274; Searcy v. Turner, 88 Ark. 210, 114 S.W. 472, and Marianna v. Vincent, 68 Ark. 244, 58 S.W. 251.
Counsel for appellant also insists that there was not sufficient evidence to support the verdict. It is sufficient answer to this to say that J. W. Allen testified that Laur...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Payne v. State, Use City of Booneville
... ... in the case, then he has waived his right under the statute ... and he can not at any time in the progress of the case avail ... himself of it. Such is the effect of our decisions. See ... Mann v. State, 37 Ark. 405; State ... v. Parker, 39 Ark. 174; Laur v ... State, 94 Ark. 178, 126 S.W. 840; Jones v ... State, 111 Ark. 51, 163 S.W. 177 ... Here ... the record shows that the defendant, "before the trial ... moved to dismiss the action for want of a bond for ... costs." It thus appears that the first affirmative step ... ...
-
Drifoos v. City of Jonesboro
... ... Marianna v. Vincent, 68 Ark. 244, 58 S.W ... 251; Kirby's Digest, section 5634; Laur v ... State, 94 Ark. 178, ... [154 S.W. 198] ... 126 ... ...
-
Payne v. State
...avail himself of it. Such is the effect of our decisions. See Mann v. State, 37 Ark. 405; State v. Parker, 39 Ark. 174; Laur v. State, 94 Ark. 178, 126 S. W. 840; Jones v. State, 111 Ark. 51, 163 S. W. 177. Here the record shows that the defendant, "before the trial moved to dismiss the act......
-
Incorporated Town of Pocahontas v. State, Use of Randolph County
...law, the presumption is that the mayor acted in his capacity as justice of the peace. 68 Ark. 244; 88 Ark. 211; 86 Ark. 442; 92 Ark. 483; 94 Ark. 178; 107 99. In such case the fines are payable into the county treasury. 56 Ark. 133; Id. 137. OPINION KIRBY, J. The appellant contends that wit......