From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Goldberger v. City of Mobile

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Apr 22, 1919
82 So. 635 (Ala. Crim. App. 1919)

Opinion

1 Div. 313.

April 22, 1919.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Mobile County; Norville R. Leigh, Jr., Judge.

B. Goldberger was convicted of a violation of a city ordinance of the city of Mobile prohibiting the sale of liquors, and he appeals. Reversed in part and remanded.

Inge Kilborn, of Mobile, for appellant.

James E. Duggan, of Mobile, for appellee.


The prosecution in this case was begun before the recorder of the city of Mobile, and charged a violation of an ordinance of the city prohibiting the sale of liquors. In the recorder's court the defendant was fined $100, and from that judgment he appealed to the circuit court. The defendant was tried in the circuit court of Mobile, before a jury, on a complaint filed by the city; was convicted, and the jury assessed a fine against him of $50. The court added an additional punishment of hard labor for a term of 90 days. This was error. Clark v. City of Uniontown, 4 Ala. App. 264, 58 So. 725; Hannibal v. City of Mobile, 80 So. 629; Jackson v. City of Mobile, 16 Ala. App. 664, 81 So. 184.

We find no error in the record affecting any proceedings of the court up to and including the rendition of the verdict of the jury and the judgment of guilt upon such verdict. For the error above mentioned in the sentence of the defendant, the part of the judgment relating to the sentence is reversed, and the cause is remanded, for further proceedings in conformity to law.

Judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Reversed in part and remanded.


Summaries of

Goldberger v. City of Mobile

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Apr 22, 1919
82 So. 635 (Ala. Crim. App. 1919)
Case details for

Goldberger v. City of Mobile

Case Details

Full title:GOLDBERGER v. CITY OF MOBILE

Court:Court of Appeals of Alabama

Date published: Apr 22, 1919

Citations

82 So. 635 (Ala. Crim. App. 1919)
82 So. 635

Citing Cases

GUIN v. CITY OF TUSCALOOSA

The jury alone is authorized to impose punishment by fine or imprisonment in such case. Clark v. Uniontown, 4…

Ex Parte Trimble

Under the ordinance, a jury could not add imprisonment or hard labor as an additional punishment, and the…