Roney v. City of Florala

Roney v. City of Florala. Violating Municipal Ordinance. (Decided April 23, 1914. 65 South. 91.) Municipal Corporation; Violating of Ordinance; Jurisdiction of City Court. — The jurisdiction of the City Court of Andalusia of offenses for violating municipal ordinances is appellate only, and where the record does not show a conviction in the municipal court, and an appeal from such conviction to the city court, no such jurisdiction is shown in the city court as will authorize this court to review the judgment, such judgment being a nullity, for want of jurisdiction. Appeal from Andalusia City Court. Heard before Hon. Ed. T. Albritton. Complaint by tbe city of Florala against Mrs. T. J. . Roney for violating a municipal ordinance. From a judgment of conviction tbe defendant appeals. Appeal dismissed. A. Wi-ialey, for appellant. The court does not take judicial knowledge of tbe substance or terms of tbe ordinance referred to in tbe complaint. — Goldthwaite v. Montgomery, 50 Ala. 86; Brown v. Mayer, 23 Ala. 722. Tbe jurisdiction of tbe city court of Andalusia in prosecutions for violations of a municipal ordinance is appellate only and as there is nothing in tbe record to show a former conviction in tbe mayor’ court, and an appeal to tbe city court therefrom, tbe judgment in tbe city court is a mere nullity. — Brown v. Mayor, supra; Jackson v. State, 91 Ala. 55; sec. 7565, Code 1907; 11 Ene. P. & P. 838, 861 and 861. L. H. Brassell, and G. W. Reeves, for appellee. No brief reached tbe Reporter. [MAJORITY — THOMAS, J.] THOMAS, J. While it seems that the demurrers to the complaint are without merit (Turner v. Town of Lineville, 2 Ala. App. 455, 56 South. 603; Rosenberg v. City of Selma, 168 Ala. 195, 52 South. 742; Goldthwaite v. City Council of Montgomery, 50 Ala. 486; Kennamer v. State, 150 Ala. 74, 43 South. 482), this being the real point attempted to be raised by the record, yet we refrain from a decision of the question, since we are without jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. The complaint mentioned Avas one filed in the Andalusia city court of law and equity, charging a violation of an ordinance of the city of Florala. The said Andalusia city court of laAV and equity has no jurisdiction of an offense in violation of the ordinances of the city of Florala except upon an appeal after a conviction before the recorder of the city of Florala. There is nothing! in the record before us shoAAdng such a conviction and appeal. For aught appearing to the contrary, the prosecution was originally commenced in the said Andalusia city court of laAV and equity. If so, its judgment of conviction here appealed from is a nullity for want of jurisdiction of the subject-matter, and will not support this appeal. — Central of Ga. Ry. Co. v. Coursen, 8 Ala. App. 590, 62 South. 977, and authorities cited. The appeal is therefore dismissed. Appeal dismissed.