People v. Ballots, 166.
| Decision Date | 02 December 1930 |
| Docket Number | No. 166.,166. |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. BALLOTS. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Error to Circuit Court, Wayne County; Ormond F. Hunt, Judge.
A complaint against Sophie Ballots, based on an ordinance penalizing the use of indecent, insulting, and immoral language, was quashed on appeal from a justice court to the circuit court, and the People bring error.
Writ dismissed.
Argued before the Entire Bench.Wilber M. Brucker, Atty. Gen., and James E. Greene, Corporation Counsel, and Frank C. McCann, Asst. Corporation Counsel, both of Dearborn, for the People.
Francis K. Young, of Detroit, for appellee.
An ordinance of the city of Dearborn penalizes the use of indecent, insulting, and immoral language.
Defendant was arrested upon a complaint, charging that, on November 6, 1929, in the city of Dearborn, she ‘was then and there a disorderly person in this, that she, the said Sophie Ballots, did then and there use indecent, immoral, profane, obscene and insulting language to this complainant.’ In the justice court she was convicted, an appeal was taken, and, in the circuit court, the complaint was quashed on the ground that it did not sufficiently inform the accused of the charge upon which she was to be tried. The people seek review by writ of error.
At the argument we requested counsel to brief the question of whether review by writ of error can be had by the people in this case. Without statutory authorization the people cannot review a criminal case by writ of error.
Section 12, chap. 10, Act No. 175, Public Acts 1927, commonly known as the Code of Criminal Procedure, provides:
‘A writ of error may be taken by and on behalf of the people of the state of Michigan in accordance with the provisions of this act in the following instances:
‘(a) From a decision or judgment quashing or setting aside any indictment where such decision or judgment is based upon the invalidity or construction of the statute upon which such indictment is founded;
‘(b) From a decision arresting a judgment of conviction or directing a judgment of acquittal for insufficiency of the indictment, where such decision is based upon the invalidity or construction of the statute upon which such indictment is founded.’
Considering for the purposes of this case (but none other) that the term ‘statute’ is inclusive of municipal ordinances, does the mentioned statute authorize this review? No attack was made upon the validity of the ordinance; the attack...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Cooke, Docket Nos. 68974
...113 Mich.App. 272, 317 N.W.2d 594 (1982).4 M.C.L. Sec. 750.75; M.S.A. Sec. 28.270.5 Const.1963, art. 1, Sec. 20.6 People v. Ballots, 252 Mich. 282, 283, 233 N.W. 229 (1930). See also Arizona v. Manypenny, 451 U.S. 232, 245-46; 101 S.Ct. 1657, 1666, 68 L.Ed.2d 58 (1981) (" ' "[I]n the federa......
-
People v. Martin
...At the common law in Michigan, the people were not permitted to appeal any orders or judgments in criminal cases. People v. Ballots, 252 Mich. 282, 283, 233 N.W. 229 (1930). By 1917 P.A. 159, § 1(a), the people were granted the right to seek a writ of error in the Supreme Court from certain......
-
People v. Mason, Docket Nos. 9627
...in the entire area left uncovered and precluded by statute. As early as 1930, a unanimous Supreme Court stated in People v. Ballots, 252 Mich. 282, 233 N.W.2d 229, that without statutory authorization the People cannot review criminal cases. This precedent has never been Additionally, the M......
-
People v. Blachura
...to authorize the Supreme Court to provide rules concerning jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals.2 This Court in People v. Ballots, 252 Mich. 282, 233 N.W. 229 (1930) faced'the question of whether review by writ of error can be had by the people in this case. Without statutory authorization ......