KLAMATH FALLS v. CAMPOS, 29 Or. App. 885 (1977)

565 P.2d 406

CITY OF KLAMATH FALLS, Appellant, v. CAMPOS, Respondent.

No. 76-196 C, CA 7411Oregon Court of Appeals.Argued May 20, 1977
Appeal dismissed June 20, 1977

Appeal from Circuit Court, Klamath County.

Wayne H. Blair, Judge Pro Tempore.

B. J. Matzen, Klamath Falls, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.

Sam A. McKeen, Klamath Falls, argued the cause for respondent.

Before Thornton, Presiding Judge, and Tanzer and Richardson, Judges.

Appeal dismissed.

RICHARDSON, J.

Page 886

[EDITORS’ NOTE: THIS PAGE IS BLANK.]

Page 887

RICHARDSON, J.

This is an appeal by the City of Klamath Falls from an order granting defendant a new trial on the ground she had not had a hearing or a ruling on her request for court appointed counsel prior to trial.

Defendant was tried in the Klamath Falls Municipal Court in a consolidated trial of 32 overtime parking citations alleging violation of city ordinance. She was found guilty by a jury of all charges. On her appeal to the circuit court she was again found guilty of all charges by a jury and was fined a total of $400. Defendant was not represented by counsel at either trial. Following trial in the circuit court defendant obtained the services of an attorney and moved for a new trial. The motion was granted and the city appeals. We dismiss the appeal on our own motion for want of jurisdiction.[1]

There is no appeal from the circuit court to this court in cases involving city ordinance violations arising in municipal court and appealed to circuit court except where the constitutionality of the ordinance is involved. ORS 221.350, 221.360. Since this case does not involve an issue as to the constitutionality of a charter provision or ordinance under which the conviction was obtained we have no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal. City of Salem v. Polanski, 202 Or. 504, 276 P.2d 407 (1954); Tillamook City v. Bogart, 9 Or. App. 428, 496 P.2d 34 (1972); City of Salem v. Kimball, 5 Or. App. 49, 482 P.2d 191 (1971); City of Portland v. Trumbull Asphalt, 2 Or. App. 1, 463 P.2d 606, Sup Ct review denied (1970).

Appeal dismissed.

[1] The defendant filed no brief and did not raise the issue of jurisdiction during argument.

Page 888

[EDITORS’ NOTE: THIS PAGE IS BLANK.]

Page 889

jdjungle

Share
Published by
jdjungle
Tags: 565 P.2d 406

Recent Posts

STATE v. MCCARTHY, 501 P.3d 478 (2021)

501 P.3d 478 (2021)369 Or. 129 STATE of Oregon, Respondent on Review, v. Charles Steven…

9 months ago

STATE EX REL. S.M. v. A.S., 196 P.3d 26 (2008)

044230S0; A134887. 196 P.3d 26 (2008) 223 Or. App. 421 STATE of Oregon ex rel.…

7 years ago

STATE v. McNALLY, 361 Or. 314 (2017)

April 20, 2017 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON STATE OF OREGON, Respondent…

9 years ago

STATE v. HAUGEN, 361 Or. 284 (2017)

March 30, 2017 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON STATE OF OREGON,…

9 years ago

IN THE MATTER OF BROWN, 361 Or. 241 (2017)

361 Or. 241 In the Matter of the Compensation of Royce L. Brown, Sr., Claimant.…

9 years ago

IN RE ROLLER, 361 Or 234 (2017)

234                                  March 9, 2017                              No. 17 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE…

9 years ago