From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Arnold v. City of Mobile

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Apr 15, 1947
30 So. 2d 40 (Ala. Crim. App. 1947)

Opinion

1 Div. 537.

April 15, 1947.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Mobile County; D. H. Edington, Judge.

Chester Arnold was convicted of violating an ordinance of the City, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

M. F. Dozier, of Mobile, for appellant.

Harry Seale, of Mobile, for appellee.


This cause originated in the Recorder's Court, where appellant was charged with the violation of a city ordinance. Upon conviction there he took an appeal to the circuit court. The instant appeal follows a judgment of conviction in the latter jurisdiction.

Appellant's counsel has not filed a brief in this court; neither do we find any errors duly assigned.

Prosecutions for the violations of municipal ordinances are in their nature quasi criminal, and on appeal the appellate courts are controlled by the rules pertaining to civil cases insofar as assignments of error are concerned. Title 15, Sec. 389, Code 1940, has no application. Casteel v. City of Decatur, 215 Ala. 4, 109 So. 571; Peever v. City Com'rs of Florence, 26 Ala. App. 213, 157 So. 79; Gentle v. City of Huntsville, 26 Ala. App. 374, 160 So. 273.

It follows, therefore, that the judgment of conviction below must be and is ordered affirmed.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Arnold v. City of Mobile

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Apr 15, 1947
30 So. 2d 40 (Ala. Crim. App. 1947)
Case details for

Arnold v. City of Mobile

Case Details

Full title:ARNOLD v. CITY OF MOBILE

Court:Court of Appeals of Alabama

Date published: Apr 15, 1947

Citations

30 So. 2d 40 (Ala. Crim. App. 1947)
30 So. 2d 40

Citing Cases

Parks v. City of Montgomery

Prosecutions for violations of municipal ordinances are statutory and quasi criminal in nature. Perry v.…

Freeman v. City of Montgomery

Prosecutions for the violations of municipal ordinances are in their nature quasi criminal, and on appeal to…