In re Munro
District Court, D. Alaska
This is an application of Bruno Munro for a writ of habeas corpus to test the legality of his imprisonment, upon conviction by the municipal court of Nome for the violation of a town ordinance. The petition raises the question of the power of the town to provide a municipal court, and challenges its jurisdiction and existence. The chief of police appeared in answer to the writ, and produced the body of the prisoner.
Read the full summary
This is an application of Bruno Munro for a writ of habeas corpus to test the legality of his imprisonment, upon conviction by the municipal court of Nome for the violation of a town ordinance. The petition raises the question of the power of the town to provide a municipal court, and challenges its jurisdiction and existence. The chief of police appeared in answer to the writ, and produced the body of the prisoner. The cause has been heard upon the allegations of the petition and submitted upon briefs, one of which is prepared and filed by R. N. Stevens, Esq., the municipal judge.
1Opinion of the Court
WICKERSHAM, District Judge.
An ordinance creating a municipal court was passed by the common council of the *280town of Nome, and approved May 13, 1901. The first section, creating the court and defining its jurisdiction, reads as follows:
“Section 1. That there he and is hereby established a municipal and police judge, whose duty it shall be to hear and determine all complaints against inhabitants of said city, against whom complaints inay be made of having violated any of the ordinances passed by the council and applicable to the inhabitants of said city, and to administer the punishment provided…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- In re ClohertyWashington Supreme Court · 1891
- Perris v. HigleySupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Ottawa v. CareySupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- McCray v. BakerWyoming Supreme Court · 1888
- People v. MaxonIdaho Supreme Court · 1870
3Cited by3 opinions
- Baker v. City of FairbanksAlaska Supreme Court · 1970
- Agana Bay Development Company (Hong Kong) Ltd. v. Supreme Court of Guam, Dillingham Corporation of the Pacific, Real Party in InterestCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1976
- Agana Bay Development Company (Hong Kong) Ltd. v. Supreme Court of Guam, Dillingham Corporation of the Pacific, Real Party in InterestCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1976