# City of Birmingham v. Brown

> Alabama Court of Appeals · June 1, 1915 · 13 Ala. App. 654

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6522773

## Case

- **Full name:** City of Birmingham v. Brown
- **Court:** Alabama Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** June 1, 1915
- **Citations:** 13 Ala. App. 654; 69 So. 263; 1915 Ala. App. LEXIS 114
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** On rehearing by Thomas
- **Judges:** Brown, Thomas
- **Cited by:** 3 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Red flag:** Reversed on other grounds by City of Birmingham v. Brown, 195 Ala. 79 (1915).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6522773

## Opinion text

ON REHEARING.
THOMAS, J.
We think the contention to the effect that the discharge of the defendant, because and for the reason that the prosecution was not commenced before the recorder within 60 days next after the commission of the offense, would be a bar to a subsequent prosecution under the state law for the same offense is entirely without merit, since the discharge of defendant ■on such ground certainly does not constitute jeopardy. —Bailey v. State, 107 Ala. 151 , 18 South. 234 ; Waddle v. Ishe, 12 Ala. 308 ; Savell v. State, 150 Ala. 97 , 43 South. 201 ; Nicholson v. State, 72 Ala. 176 ; Morrisette v. State, 77 Ala. 71 .
However, we are unable to see how, even if it did, it •could affect the consideration of the question before us. We find no reason for altering the views or holding expressed in the opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6522773. Public record. Not legal advice.