City of Red Wing v. Nibbe
Cited by
- State v. Tessema 515 N.W.2d 626 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
- City of St. Paul v. DiBucci 229 N.W.2d 507 Minn. 1975
- Appeal of O'Rourke 220 N.W.2d 811 Minn. 1974
- Stolp v. Scrimshaw 220 N.W.2d 811 Minn. 1974
- City of St. Paul v. Hurd 216 N.W.2d 259 Minn. 1974
- State v. Brown 209 N.W.2d 920 Minn. 1973
- City of St. Paul v. Whidby 203 N.W.2d 823 Minn. 1972
- State v. Hardin 202 N.W.2d 212 Minn. 1972
- State v. Thomas 156 N.W.2d 745 Minn. 1968
- State v. Ettesvold 117 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 1962
- State v. Ketterer 79 N.W.2d 136 Minn. 1956
- State v. Finley 64 N.W.2d 769 Minn. 1954
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- State v. Lee 29 Minn. 445
- City of Mankato v. Arnold 36 Minn. 62
- State v. Sexton 42 Minn. 154
- State v. Harris 50 Minn. 128
- State v. Robitshek 60 Minn. 123
- State v. Grimes 83 Minn. 460
- State v. Marciniak 97 Minn. 355
- City of Madison v. Martin 109 Minn. 292
- 276 Minn. 207 not in our corpus
- State ex rel. Salter v. McDonald 141 N.W. 110
- City of St. Paul v. Robinson 129 Minn. 383
- State v. Broms 139 Minn. 402
- City of Virginia v. Erickson 141 Minn. 21
- Kannellos v. Great Northern Railway Co. 157 Minn. 505
- State v. Nelson 196 N.W. 279
Opinion text
Taylor, C. Defendant was convicted, before a justice of the peace of the city of Red Wing, of the violation of an ordinance of that city, and sentenced to pay a fine of $50 and costs or be committed to the county jail for a period of 15 days unless the fine was sooner paid. He attempted to appeal to the district court. The city charter expressly provides that no appeal shall be allowed in such cases and the district court dismissed the appeal. Whether this ruling was correct is the only question presented to this court. We answer it in the affirmative. Defendant contends that section 7638, G. S. 1913, which provides that “any person convicted of a criminal offense by a justice may appeal to the district court,” gives him the right to appeal notwithstanding the provision to the contrary in the city charter. This section relates to prosecutions under the general laws for crimes against the state. It has long been settled that the violation of a city ordinance is not a criminal offense against the state, but only against the municipality enacting the ordinance, and that the provisions for enforcing such ordinances and for prosecuting violations thereof need not conform to the provisions for prosecuting violation's of the state laws. State v. Lee, 29 Minn. 445 , 13 N. W. 913 ; City of Mankato v. Arnold, 36 Minn. 62 , 30 N. W. 305 ; State v. Sexton, 42 Minn. 154 , 43 N. W. 845 ; State v. Harris, 50 Minn. 128 , 52 N. W. 387, 531 ; State v. Robitshek, 60 Minn. 123 , 61 N. W. 1023 , 33 L. R. A. 33; State v. Grimes, 83 Minn. 460 , 86 N. W. 449 ; State v. Marciniak, 97 Minn. 355 , 105 N. W. 965 ; City of Madison v. Martin, 109 Minn. 292 , 123 N. W. 809 ; State v. McDonald, 121 *276 Minn. 207 , 141 N. W. 110 ; City of St. Paul v. Robinson, 129 Minn. 383 , 152 N. W. 777 , Ann. Cas. 1916E, 845; State v. Broms, 139 Minn. 402 , 166 N. W. 771 ; City of Virginia v. Erickson, 141 Minn. 21 , 168 N. W. 821 ; State v. Nelson, 157 Minn. 505 , 196 N. W. 279 . . If a city should exceed the power granted it, or should impose penalties which place the offense beyond the jurisdiction of a justice of the peace, other questions would be presented not involved here. The right to appeal is purely statutory, and it was within the province of the legislative power that enacted the Red Wing charter to withhold that right from those convicted under its ordinances. Whether the charter could abrogate the right to review such proceedings by certiorari presents a different question not involved in this case. Order affirmed.