|
Oliver Skelton and Clarence Swindle
v.
City of Tuscaloosa
6 Div. 120
Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama
Jan. 12, 1971
(CITE AS: 243 SO.2D 388, 46 ALA.APP. 404)
Defendants were convicted before the Circuit Court,
Tuscaloosa County, Aubrey Dominick, J., of violating ordinance requiring
them to wear protective helmets while driving motorcycles, and they
appealed. On city's motion to dismiss appeal, the Court of Criminal
Appeals, Almon, J., held that defendants' failure to serve city with
copy of defendants' brief within time prescribed required dismissal of
appeal.
Appeal dismissed.
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS
Failure of defendants, who were convicted of violating ordinance
requiring wearing of protective helmets while driving motorcycles, to
serve city with copy of defendants' appellate brief in time prescribed
required dismissal of appeal. Supreme Court Rules, rule 11.
Richard C. Shelby and J. Knox Argo, Tuscaloosa, for appellee.
ALMON, Judge.
This is an appeal from a trial de novo in the Circuit Court of
Tuscaloosa County where appellants were convicted of violating a
Tuscaloosa City Ordinance requiring them to wear protective helmets
while driving motorcycles. Appellee, the City of Tuscaloosa, has moved
to dismiss this appeal because of appellants' failure to serve a copy of
their brief on the City Attorney. According to the Certificate of
Service in appellants' brief, a copy of their brief was served on the
Attorney General of the State of Alabama rather than the City Attorney
representing the City of Tuscaloosa.
Prosecutions under City Ordinance have long been deemed
quasi-criminal in nature and on appeal to this Court are subject to the
rules governing civil appeals. Alabama Digest, Municipal
Corporations, k642(1).
It follows then that this appeal is governed by Supreme Court Rule
11, which is as follows:
"Each brief shall be signed by the party
filing the same or his attorney and shall contain a certificate at
the end thereof, signed by the party or his attorney, that a copy
thereof has been delivered or mailed to one of the attorneys for the
opposing party, if represented by counsel, or to the opposing party
if not so represented and his address is known; and the certificate
shall show the date of such delivery or mailing and the person to
whom delivered or mailed."
Therefore, appellants' failure to serve appellee with a copy of their
brief within the time prescribed requires dismissal of this appeal. Dexter
Service Co. v. Thames Lumber & Mfg. Co. , 281 Ala. 451, 204
So.2d 147; Board of Com'rs of City of Montgomery v. Crenshaw ,
270 Ala. 598, 120 So.2d 870.
(end)
Back
|