City of Detroit v. Ritchey
Michigan Court of Appeals
1Per curiam
Defendant was convicted by a jury of loitering in the City of Detroit in violation of a Detroit city ordinance.* Upon appeal, she questions the constitutionality of the ordinance and whether there was sufficient evidence to support the verdict of the jury.
The first challenge has already been answered by this Court. We have determined that:
“The ordinance does not prohibit standing on a sidewalk, but only standing on a sidewalk so as to hinder or impede pedestrian traffic. Thus the Detroit loitering ordinance achieves its obvious regulatory purpose of keeping sidewalks clear and is not…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- People v. EaggerMichigan Court of Appeals · 1966
- City of Detroit v. WedlowMichigan Court of Appeals · 1969
- People v. DanlesMichigan Court of Appeals · 1969
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. EckerSupreme Court of Florida · 1975
- Henrichs Ex Rel. Oberbillig v. HildrethSupreme Court of Iowa · 1973
- State v. E.L.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1992