Legal Opinion

City of Birmingham v. Williams

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided June 26, 1934No. 6 Div. 597PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Questions certified by Court of Appeals.

Questions certified by the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court, under Code 1923, § 7322.

Questions answered.

Answering questions certified in 155 Sot 878.

June 5, 1934.

To the Honorable Supreme Court of Alabama,

Sirs: It seems to us that the violation of the terms of a penal city ordinance is an “offense” within the meaning of section 9 of the Constitution of 1901. 16 C. J. 282. And that a trial therefor before a competent tribunal constitutes “jeopardy of * * * limb.”

And that to allow the city to appeal from a judgment of acquittal rendered on such trial…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Ex Parte LangeSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
  2. Hurst v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
  3. Portland v. EricksonOregon Supreme Court · 1900
  4. Costello v. FeaginSupreme Court of Alabama · 1909
  5. Noland v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1905

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Ex Parte HallSupreme Court of Alabama · 1951
  2. Donahey v. City of MontgomeryAlabama Court of Appeals · 1965
  3. Birmingham v. EvansCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1974
  4. Birmingham v. EvansCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1974
  5. Donahey v. City of MontgomeryAlabama Court of Appeals · 1965

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API