All municipal courts having authority to try offenses against the laws of the municipal corporations in which such courts are located shall have the power and authority:
(Ga. L. 1878-79, p. 153, § 1; Civil Code 1895, § 712; Civil Code 1910, § 857; Code 1933, § 69-704; Ga. L. 1985, p. 1391, § 1; Ga. L. 1987, p. 3, § 36.)
Law reviews.- For annual survey of local government law, see 38 Mercer L. Rev. 289 (1986).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
Mayor authorized to impose sentence consisting of fine, or in case of default, labor upon public streets. Leonard v. Mayor of Eatonton, 126 Ga. 63, 54 S.E. 963 (1906).
For contrary view, holding that mayor had no power in absence of express legislative authority to impose a sentence of labor, see Brieswick v. Brunswick, 51 Ga. 639 (1874); Carr v. City of Conyers, 84 Ga. 287, 10 S.E. 630 (1890); Williams v. Sewell, 121 Ga. 665, 49 S.E. 732 (1905).
Sentencing authority of recorder courts.
- Enactment of O.C.G.A. § 36-32-5 did not evince a legislative intent to limit the authority of a recorder's court to the imposition of an alternative sentence consisting of either a fine or other punishment; the intent was merely to broaden the authority of a recorder's court so as to permit the imposition of such an alternative sentence in addition to the fine. City of LaGrange v. Hatfield, 175 Ga. App. 697, 334 S.E.2d 25 (1985) (construing section as it existed prior to 1985 amendment).
Ordinances construed together.
- When three ordinances of a city provide, among other things, that the judge of the municipal court may impose, under certain circumstances, a fine or confinement in the station house, or both, and upon the refusal of the defendant to pay the fine, the court may by order require the person so refusing to work on the streets or some public works, such ordinances, relative to the enforcement thereof by the imposition of a fine are to be construed together. Lyons v. Collier, 125 Ga. 231, 54 S.E. 183 (1906); Jones v. Lanford, 141 Ga. 646, 81 S.E. 885 (1914).
When one sentence is unauthorized.
- Sentence imposing two penalties in the alternative, one of which is unauthorized, is not void, but may be enforced as to the penalty which is authorized. Brown v. City of Atlanta, 123 Ga. 497, 51 S.E. 507 (1905).
Alternative provisions.
- When, under the charter and ordinances of a city, the mayor has authority to punish one convicted of violating the municipal ordinances by imprisonment or compulsory labor on public works, or by fine, a sentence directing "confinement on the streets" is not rendered unlawful merely because an alternative provision is added by which the defendant may be discharged at any time upon the payment of a fine. Shuler v. Willis, 126 Ga. 73, 54 S.E. 965 (1906).
Sentence held to be alternative.
- When, upon the trial of one charged with the violation of a municipal ordinance, the court, on conviction of the accused, rendered judgment that the defendant pay a fine of $25.00 dollars, or, in default thereof, that the defendant be imprisoned in the calaboose 30 days, such judgment imposed an alternative sentence. Leonard v. Mayor of Eatonton, 126 Ga. 63, 54 S.E. 963 (1906); Hardy v. Mayor of Eatonton, 128 Ga. 27, 57 S.E. 99 (1907).
Review after execution.
- Defendant who has paid a fine imposed by a police court, with the alternative of imprisonment, cannot, after paying such fine, prosecute a writ of error to review the judgment unless the fine was paid under protest and under duress. Brown v. City of Atlanta, 123 Ga. 497, 51 S.E. 507 (1905); White v. City of Tifton, 1 Ga. App. 569, 57 S.E. 1038 (1907); Kitchens v. State, 4 Ga. App. 440, 61 S.E. 736 (1908).
Cited in Maner v. Dykes, 183 Ga. 118, 187 S.E. 699 (1936); City of Albany v. Key, 124 Ga. App. 16, 183 S.E.2d 20 (1971).
RESEARCH REFERENCES
Am. Jur. 2d.
- 21 Am. Jur. 2d, Courts, § 44.
C.J.S.- 62 C.J.S., Municipal Corporations, § 323 et seq.
ALR.
- Delegating authority to county or municipal corporation to make violation of ordinance crime or to provide criminal punishment, 174 A.L.R. 1343.