Thomas v. City of Birmingham, 6 Div. 1
Decision Date | 06 October 1964 |
Docket Number | 6 Div. 1 |
Citation | 42 Ala.App. 542,171 So.2d 84 |
Parties | Joe Ann THOMAS v. CITY OF BIRMINGHAM. |
Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Arthur Shores and Orzell Billingsley, Jr., Birmingham, Jack Greenberg, Norman C. Amaker and Chas. H. Jones, Jr., New York City, for appellant.
This is an appeal from conviction of breach of an ordinance forbidding, among other things, remaining on lands of another after being warned not to. Birmingham City Code 1944, § 1436, as amended. The appellant was fined $80.00 and costs.
On April 22, 1963, the assistant manager of Atlantic Mills Thrift Center in Birmingham, at the direction of the manager, asked the appellant to leave the parking lot. The appellant was walking to and fro holding a placard bearing a text not shown.
The point from which she was ordered was used for parking and access for pedestrians to go to the store. It was about two hundred yards from the public sidewalk since the store was set back half a block.
At that time the City had a number of subsisting ordinances calling for segregation, viz.: § § 369, 597, 859, 939, 1110 and 1111 of the General Code of the City of Birmingham 1944.
Section 369, supra (repealed July 23, 1963), required segregation of white and colored persons in restaurants. Gober v. City of Birmingham, 373 U.S. 374, 83 S.Ct. 1311, 10 L.Ed.2d 419.
Section 597, supra (also repealed), forbade Negroes and white persons to play together at cards, dice, dominoes or checkers. Likewise, the owner or keeper of a tavern, inn, restaurant or other public house was punishable for knowingly permitting such playing together on his premises.
Section 859, supra (repealed since), segregated audiences at theatres, etc.
Section 1110 and 1111, supra (repealed), required separate toilet facilities both as to sex and race in work places.
There was no evidence that the appellant was seeking to enter the Atlantic Mills Thrift Center. Her brief reads in part:
We have this day reversed and rendered King v. City of Montgomery, Ala.App., 168 So.2d 30 and Embry v. City of Montgomery, Ala.App., 168 So.2d 495, on authority of Robinson v. Florida, 378 U.S. 153, 84 S.Ct. 1693, 12 L.Ed.2d 771.
We fail to see any connection between the instant case and Robinson v. Florida, supra, Peterson v....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Grider v. State
... ... of second-degree assault, a violation of § 13A-6-21, Ala.Code 1975. He was sentenced as a habitual ... According to Rule 11.2(a)(1), Ala. R.Crim.P., the defense may petition the ... Cr.App.1988) ... In Thomas v. State, 766 So.2d 860 (Ala. Cr.App.1998), ... ...
-
Cozart v. State, 8 Div. 934
... ... The questions for decision are: (1) Whether we, without any transcript of the evidence, can ... place in question is the middle portion, or [of] a 413.6 acre tract, of Patton Island in Lauderdale County, Alabama, ... ...
-
Brickley v. State
... ... Ex parte Kenneth L. BRICKLEY ... 8 Div. 326 ... Supreme Court of Alabama ... Oct. 8, ... general rules as to the policy of the law are: (1) To keep the jury in a criminal case entirely ... ...
-
Jones v. State
...523 So.2d 518 ... Damon Lamar JONES ... 3 Div. 747 ... Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama ... sentenced by the trial court under § 13A-5-6(a)(5), Code of Alabama (1975), when the trial ... A "deadly weapon" is defined by § 13A-1-2(11) as: ... "A firearm or ... ...