Williams v. City Of Valdosta

• Decision Date: 04 November 1933
• Docket Number: No. 23507.,23507.
• Citation: 47 Ga.App. 810,171 S.E. 553
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
• Parties: WILLIAMS . v. CITY OF VALDOSTA.

47 Ga.App. 810

171 S.E. 553

WILLIAMS .

v.CITY OF VALDOSTA.

No. 23507.

Court of Appeals of Georgia, Division No. 1.

Nov. 4, 1933.

Syllabus by the Court.

1. Where in a municipal court, under the evidence adduced, there is shown a violation of the penal law of this state, that courtis without authority to punish therefor unless it appears that the conduct of the defendant was also a breach of an ordinance of the municipality. The evidence and the ordinance must show some characterizing ingredient, not contained in the offense under the state law, to be punishable by the municipality.

2. Although, under the evidence, the defendant might have been guilty of a crime punishable under the law of this state, she was not guilty of disorderly conduct under the municipal ordinance. The court, therefore, erred in overruling her certiorari.

3. The assignments of error in the petition for certiorari are sufficiently definite to be considered by this court.

Error from Superior Court, Lowndes County; W. E. Thomas, Judge.

Willie Pearl Williams was convicted of disorderly conduct in the recorder's court of the city of Valdosta, and she brings error.

Reversed.

W. A. Morgan and W. E. Perry, both of Valdosta, for plaintiff in error.

Franklin & Langdale and H. C. Eberhardt, all of Valdosta, for defendant in error.

GUERRY, Judge.

1-3. Willie Pearl Williams was convicted in the recorder's court of the city of Valdosta, of the offense of "disorderly conduct, " under a municipal ordinance as follows: "It shall be unlawful for any person to act in a violent, turbulent, boisterous, indecent, or disorderly manner, or to use profane, vulgar, or obscene language in the city, tending to disturb good order, peace, and dignity of said city." The petition for certiorari discloses that the evidence for the city shows that at about 3 o'clock in the morning the police office received a "mysterious call" to go to Willie Pearl Williams' house, "that a man would be found there, " no name being given as to who was calling. An officer was sent to the house, and, when he knocked on the door, the defendant came to the door in her nightclothes and the policeman entered the house and found the bed in such a condition as to indicate that some one or more persons had been occupying it. Willie Pearl Williams was a negro woman. A white man. dressed only in his underclothes, was discovered in a closet in the room. He tried to prevent the policeman from opening the door to the closet, and gave as his excuse that he was there to buy whisky and that he was waiting for the defendant's husband to come, to purchase the same. The court in its answer to the certiorari said: "Under this evidence I reached the conclusion that the de fendant was guilty of an indecent act in occupying a room with a white man, in an almost nude condition, at that hour of the morning and I imposed the fine or alternative sentence as stated. * * *" We think the court erred in overruling the petition for certiorari. The evidence raises a most violent suspicion that a penal law of this state was violated, but we are not prepared to say that it shows a violation of the municipal ordinance quoted above. There is no evidence of any violent, boisterous, or turbulent acting. On the contrary, we are constrained to believe that the utmost quiet prevailed. The only part of the ordinance which might be shown to have been...