From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Russell v. City of Bessemer

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Jan 22, 1924
99 So. 53 (Ala. Crim. App. 1924)

Opinion

6 Div. 346.

January 22, 1924.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County, Bessemer Division; J.C.B. Gwin, Judge.

Prosecution by the City of Bessemer against Will Russell for the violation of a prohibition ordinance. From a judgment of conviction, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

See, also, ante, p. 270, 97 So. 149.

Benton Bentley, of Bessemer, for appellant.

No brief reached the Reporter.

G.H. Bumgardner, of Bessemer, for appellee.

No brief reached the Reporter.


The defendant was convicted in the mayor's court of the city of Bessemer for the violation of one of its municipal ordinances; the specific charge being a violation of the prohibition laws of the city. He appealed to the circuit court, and from a judgment of conviction in that court for the same offense this appeal is taken.

It has many times been held that the prosecution for a violation of a municipal ordinance is statutory and quasi criminal in its nature, and that the statute, Code 1907, § 6264, under the terms of which no assignment of error is necessary in a criminal case, does not apply to quasi criminal appeals as for the violation of an ordinance of a municipal corporation. Craig v. City of Birmingham, 14 Ala. App. 630, 71 So. 983; Perry's Case, 1 Ala. App. 253, 55 So. 1035; Dreyfus v. City of Montgomery, 4 Ala. App. 270, 58 So. 730. In the Dreyfus Case it is stated:

"Where the appeal is from a conviction for a violation of a city ordinance, the party appealing must assign errors as in civil cases, and on failure to do so an affirmance will follow."

In the instant case errors are assigned, but, as no brief has been filed in behalf of appellant, they must of necessity be treated as waived and not insisted upon; for assignments of error not discussed nor mentioned in appellant's brief are considered waived. Patt v. Welsch, 18 Ala. App. 82, 89 So. 94; Hill Gro. Co. v. Hameker, 18 Ala. App. 84, 89 So. 850.

"Assignments of error not insisted on in brief not considered." Watson v. Rollins, 18 Ala. App. 125, 90 So. 60; Am. Ry. Exp. Co. v. Barnes, 18 Ala. App. 295, 91 So. 912.

The trial court had jurisdiction of the subject-matter and of the person, and, as no insistence of error appears, the judgment appealed from will stand affirmed.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Russell v. City of Bessemer

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Jan 22, 1924
99 So. 53 (Ala. Crim. App. 1924)
Case details for

Russell v. City of Bessemer

Case Details

Full title:RUSSELL v. CITY OF BESSEMER

Court:Court of Appeals of Alabama

Date published: Jan 22, 1924

Citations

99 So. 53 (Ala. Crim. App. 1924)
99 So. 53

Citing Cases

Stinson v. City of Birmingham

In this state of the record, we have for consideration only questions raised by appellant's assignment of…

State v. Town of Springville

. 87, 22 So. 453; Brown v. State, 115 Ala. 74, 22 So. 458; White v. Burgin, 113 Ala. 170, 21 So. 832; State…