City of Greensboro v. Shields
Supreme Court of North Carolina
CumiNAL Action heard at Fall Term, 1877, of Guilporu .'Superior Court, before Buxton, J. The Mayor of Greensboro issued a warrant for an affray :against the defendants in the above entitled action, and upon the trial before him, they were adjudged guilty and a -fine imposed, from which judgment the defendant, Shields, ^appealed; and His Honor upon motion of defendant’s counsel dismissed the case, for that, the Mayor had no jurisdiction, nor was the particular city ordinance…
Read the full summary
CumiNAL Action heard at Fall Term, 1877, of Guilporu .'Superior Court, before Buxton, J. The Mayor of Greensboro issued a warrant for an affray :against the defendants in the above entitled action, and upon the trial before him, they were adjudged guilty and a -fine imposed, from which judgment the defendant, Shields, ^appealed; and His Honor upon motion of defendant’s counsel dismissed the case, for that, the Mayor had no jurisdiction, nor was the particular city ordinance alleged to have been violated, specifically set out in the warrant; and from this ruling, Staples, City Attorney,…
1Opinion of the Court
Bynum J.
The chief officer of cities and towns has the same criminal jurisdiction within the city limits, as is given to Justices of the Peace; and Justices of the Peace have final jurisdiction over affrays, the offence specified in this- proceeding, on a compliance with certain preliminary conditions. Bat. Rev. ch. 83 § 115, and ch. 111 § 30.
If therefore this action had been commenced in the name-of the State only, and in compliance with the statutory requisites which confer final jurisdiction, it would have been lawful for the Mayor to try and punish these offenders as ho has done.
But as a…
2Cited by3 opinions
- State v. WiggsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
- State v. PalletSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
- Hendersonville v. . McMinnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1880