State v. Gibbons

• Decision Date: 01 April 1938
• Docket Number: No. 31744.,31744.
• Parties: STATE ex rel. BEST v. GIBBONS, Sheriff.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

278 N.W. 578

202 Minn. 421

STATE ex rel. BEST v. GIBBONS, Sheriff.

No. 31744.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

April 1, 1938.

Habeas corpus proceeding by the State, on the relation of Wilbur Sherman Best, against Thomas J. Gibbons, Sheriff of Ramsey County, challenging the jurisdiction of a justice of the peace of the Town of Rose in the County of Ramsey to determine a charge of petit larceny of which relator was convicted.

Writ discharged.

Eugene F. Matthews, of St. Paul, for relator.

M. F. Kinkead, Co. Atty., and James F. Lynch and Richard B. Ryan, Asst. Co. Attys., all of St. Paul, for respondent.

PETERSON, Justice.

Relator by writ of habeas corpus issued out of this court challenges the jurisdiction of a justice of the peace of the town of Rose in the county of Ramsey to hear and determine a charge of petit larceny for which he was convicted. His claim before the justice and in this court is that Laws 1921, c. 362, abolished the criminal jurisdiction of all justices of the peace in Ramsey county. Chapter 362 is entitled, "An act to amend the laws relating to the municipal court of the city of St. Paul," and the provision thereof upon which relator relies is as follows: "The said court [Municipal Court of St. Paul] shall have exclusive jurisdiction to hear all complaints and conduct all examinations and trials in criminal cases arising or triable within the County of Ramsey heretofore cognizable before a justice of the peace or arising under the charter, ordinances, laws, regulations or by-laws of the said city of St. Paul." Section 1. In opposition to the writ it is contended that the quoted portion of chapter 362 is unconstitutional upon the grounds that it is special legislation and violative of so much of the State Constitution, art. 4, § 33, as provides: "The legislature shall pass no local or special law * * * regulating the powers, duties and practice of justices of the peace, magistrates and constables."

1. Under section 8 of article 6 of the Constitution, the Legislature has the power to "provide for the election of a sufficient number of justices of the peace in each county * * * whose duties and compensation shall be prescribed by law." Under this provision the Legislature has the power to determine how many justices there shall be in any county and what shall be their duties. The Legislature may determine that there shall be no justice of the peace in any given county or portion thereof and it may restrict the constitutional jurisdiction of justices of the peace. Burke v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Ry. Co., 35 Minn. 172, 28 N.W. 190; Smith v. Victorin, 54 Minn. 338, 56 N.W. 47. Under section 1 of article 6 of the Constitution, the Legislature has the power from time to time to establish, by a two-thirds vote, courts inferior to the Supreme Court. It may confer on these courts exclusive jurisdiction. It may confer on them the jurisdiction ordinarily exercised by justices of the peace and abolish the jurisdiction of the justice of the peace so conferred upon such courts. Burke v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Ry. Co., supra; State ex rel. v. Sullivan, 67 Minn. 379, 69 N.W. 1094; State ex rel. v. Dreger, 97 Minn. 221, 106 N.W. 904; Dahlsten v. Anderson, 99 Minn. 340, 109 N.W. 697; State ex rel. Meister v. Stanway, 174 Minn. 608, 219 N.W. 452.

2. The quoted portion of chapter 362 is violative of the quoted portion of section 33, article 4, supra, because it is special legislation regulating the powers, duties, and practices of justices of the peace and magistrates. It deals exclusively with the laws relating to the municipal court of the city of St. Paul. It does not even purport to be general legislation. It regulates the powers, duties, and practice of the justices of the peace in Ramsey county outside of the city of St. Paul by entirely abolishing their jurisdiction of criminal cases. The judges of the municipal court of St. Paul are magistrates. Compton v. State of Alabama, 214 U.S. 1, 29 S.Ct. 605, 53 L.Ed. 885, 16 Ann.Cas. 1098; Marks v. Eckerman, 57 App.D.C. 340, 23 F.2d 761; Collins v. Traeger, 9 Cir., 27 F.2d 842; State ex rel. Myers v. Allen, 83 Fla. 655, 92 So. 155; Sprague v. Androscoggin County, 104 Me. 352, 71 A. 1090; Gugenhine v. Gerk, 326 Mo. 333, 31 S.W.2d 1; People v. Hanley, 121 Misc. 624, 202 N.Y.S. 87; 2 Bouv.Law Dict., 3d Ed., page 2061. The statute regulates the powers, duties, and practice of magistrates by enlarging the jurisdiction of the municipal court of the city of St. Paul so as to confer upon it exclusive jurisdiction in Ramsey county of all misdemeanors and the power to act as committing magistrate.

3. It is contended, however, that section 33 of article 4 of the Constitution has no application to legislation relating to the creation of courts and that the power of the Legislature under section 1 of article 6 is unlimited and unaffected by section 33 of article 4. That this is generally true is settled by our decisions in State ex rel. v. Sullivan, State ex rel. v. Dreger, and Dahlsten v. Anderson, supra, but it is not without qualification. Those cases did not involve or decide the precise point before us for decision. It is to be remembered that in the absence of constitutional provision the power of the Legislature to create courts...