Miller v. City of Birmingham, 6 Div. 377

Decision Date07 January 1969
Docket Number6 Div. 377
Citation218 So.2d 281,44 Ala.App. 628
PartiesJames William MILLER v. CITY OF BIRMINGHAM.
CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

Wm. Conway, Birmingham, for appellant.

Wm. C. Walker, Birmingham, for appellee.

CATES, Judge.

Miller was accused of indecent exposure contrary to a Birmingham ordinance. He appealed from a conviction in the Recorder's Court. In the Circuit Court he was tried de novo with a jury.

He was found guilty, fined $100 and assessed additional punishment of ninety days imprisonment in the city jail.

I.

The first assignment of error complains of the circuit court's overruling Miller's motion to quash the City Attorney's complaint for the trial de novo.

Complaint is made that Miller was arrested on a warrant sworn to by Donna Jean Lawson before James R. Davis described as 'Magistrate of Recorder's Court.'

Davis is averred to be a member of the police force of the city. His authority derives from an ordinance (64--48) based on Act No. 100, August 24, 1964.

The title of Act No. 100, Appendix 14A, § 1601 (129--145), Michie's 1958 Code, reads:

'To apply in and only in each city in this state having a population of 300,000 or more, according the last or any subsequent decennial federal census; to provide for the creation of the office of City Magistrate and the appointment of City Magistrates; to define the qualifications, powers and duties of City Magistrates; and to provide for search warrants and warrants of arrest.'

The qualifications of the office of city magistrate laid down in said Act are:

'Section. 4. No person shall be appointed a city magistrate unless he be over the age of 25, a resident of the city for two or more years, of good moral character and have a high school education or its equivalent, except that any police officer with ten years service on the police force of the city and a present rank of at least lieutenant shall be deemed eligible for said appointment.'

In its brief the City argues as follows:

'* * * There is absolutely no evidence in this case that appellant, when in Recorder's Court, made demand for a written complaint or for a different complaint than the one on which he was tried. If appellant proceeded to trial in Recorder's Court without demanding a written complaint, he is held to have waived the right to such complaint, and later on appeal, he cannot for the first time avail of it. Chaney v. City of Birmingham, 246 Ala. 147, 21 So.2d 263. Ipso facto appellant cannot now complain of the complaint on which he was tried.'

In the Chaney case there were two questions certified to the Supreme Court. The second was:

'* * * Second, whether in order to invoke the jurisdiction of the next higher court on appeal from a recorder's court in a prosecution for violation of a municipal ordinance, the transcript must affirmatively disclose the affidavit upon which the accused was first tried in the subordinate tribunal.'

The response on this point reads:

'Second. On appeal from a prosecution in a recorder's court for violation of a municipal ordinance, the record need not disclose the affidavit upon which accused was tried in the inferior court. A written complaint, duly filed by the city attorney, suffices to apprise the accused of the nature and character of the action against him.

'While one on trial in a recorder's court for the violation of a municipal ordinance is entitled to be apprised of the nature and cause of the prosecution against him by a written complaint (Mayor, etc., of City of Birmingham v. O'Hearn, 149 Ala. 307, 42 So. 836, 11 Ann.Cas. 1131; McKinstry v. City of Tuscaloosa, 172 Ala. 344, 347, 54 So. 629), that an accused was arrested and tried in such court without a written complaint (affidavit) does not render the judgment there entered void for want of jurisdiction. Brooke v. State, 155 Ala. 78, 45 So. 491; Sherrod v. State, 197 Ala. 286, 72 So. 540. This for the reason that he may waive the right. 43 C.J. 459.

'If the defendant proceed to trial in such court without demanding such complaint he is held to have waived the right and, later on appeal, he cannot for the first time avail of it. Aderhold v. City of Anniston, 99 Ala. 521, 12 So. 472; McKinstry case, supra; Sherrod case, supra; Clark v. City of Uniontown, 4 Ala.App. 264, 58 So. 725; Wofford Oil Co. v. City of Russellville, 20 Ala.App. 14, 100 So. 304; Worthington v. City of Jasper, 197 Ala. 589, 73 So. 116; Arzumanian v. City of Birmingham, 165 Ala. 374, 51 So. 645.

'In order to abate the proceedings in the appellante court because of the lack of an affidavit before the recorder the transcript must affirmatively show that objection to trial without one was seasonably interposed when accused was arraigned and tried in the recorder's court. No defect in the proceedings, other than wants of jurisdiction apparent on the face of them, will subject the cause to dismissal on appeal. To authorize dismissal of the proceedings in the appellate court it must affirmatively appear that the judgment of the lower court was void for lack of jurisdiction. City of Selma v. Stewart, 67 Ala. 338, 340; Casteel v. City of Decatur, 215 Ala. 4, 109 So. 571; 42 C.J. pp. 481, 484, §§ 711, 721.

'Therefore, unless the transcript on appeal does show a violation of this right to be tried on a proper written complaint it is regarded as having been waived and the objection is unavailing in the court to which the appeal proceeded. Oldham v. Town of Rogersville, 26 Ala.App. 372, 160 So. 272; McKinstry and Stewart Cases, supra.

'Trial on appeal from a recorder's court is de novo and the entire transcript from the lower court need not be sent up. Bouyer v. City of Bessemer, 17 Ala.App. 665, 88 So. 192. It is held that the jurisdictional recitals of the appeal bond suffice to give the court to which the appeal is taken jurisdiction of the cause (Ex parte McLosky, 210 Ala. 458, 98 So. 708; Lee v. State, 10 Ala.App. 191, 64 So. 637), and on appeal the complaint signed by the city prosecuting attorney is regarded as sufficient to satisfy the requisites that the accused is entitled to be apprised of the nature and character of the accusation, although the record does not disclose an affidavit before the recorder. Fealy v. City of Birmingham, 15 Ala.App. 367(9), 73 So. 296.'

It may be that to appoint a police officer as a City Magistrate may in the case of warrants either for arrests or searches breach constitutional bounds. State v. Furmage, 250 N.C. 616, 109 S.E.2d 563; State v. Paulick, 277 Minn. 140, 151 N.W.2d 591 and State v. Ruotolo, 52 N.J. 508, 247 A.2d 1.

However, the question is not before us because (1) the record fails to show that any objection was made in the Recorder's Court; (2) under Code 1940, T. 13, § 98, this court cannot pass adversely on the constitutionality of Act No. 100; and (3) nothing shows us that Davis was a city police officer.

II.

Assignment of error 2 is argued to the effect that grounds 5 and 6 of appellant's demurrer to the City's complaint in the circuit court were apt.

The City attorney's complaint de novo filed in the circuit court reads in pertinent part as follows:

'Comes the City of Birmingham, Alabama, a municipal corporation, and complains that James William Miller, defendant, within twelve months before the beginning of this prosecution on, to-wit: December 31, 1966, and within the City of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Clark v. City of Mobile
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • February 7, 1978
    ...trial upon the Solicitor's complaint. This case comes squarely under the facts and law of Chaney, supra. See also Miller v. City of Birmingham, 44 Ala.App. 628, 218 So.2d 281. Neither can appellant argue that the Solicitor's complaint does not apprise him of the nature of the charge against......
  • Freeman v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • December 9, 1969
    ...witnesses is not sufficiently cogent in the instant record. Cooper v. State, 31 Ala.App. 356, 18 So.2d 420; Miller v. City of Birmingham, 44 Ala.App. 628, 218 So.2d 281(3). Basically, contradictions of the hypothetical magnitude to support a motion to exclude the prosecution's entire proof ......
  • Simmons v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Appeals
    • January 21, 1969
    ... ... 44 Ala.App. 626 ... Katie Lou SIMMONS ... 5 Div. 720 ... Court of Appeals of Alabama ... Jan ... Dillon, IV, Alexander City, for appellant ...         MacDonald ... ...
  • Patterson v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • August 14, 1984
    ...50 Ala.App. 321, 322, 278 So.2d 769 (1973); Fuller v. State, 45 Ala.App. 133, 135, 226 So.2d 677 (1969); Miller v. City of Birmingham, 44 Ala.App. 628, 631, 218 So.2d 281 (1969). The judgment of the circuit court is AFFIRMED. All Judges concur. ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT