273 N.W. 233 | Minn. | 1937
The provisions of the Minnesota constitution involved are art. 1, § 4: "The right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate * * *" and § 6: "In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy, public trial, by an impartial jury * * *." We have repeatedly held, however, that these provisions of the constitution were not intended to, and did not, cover the multitude of so-called petty offenses arising under municipal ordinances and that there is no right to a jury trial in such cases. City of Mankato v. Arnold,
Respondent contends, however, that at the time of the passage of the ordinance under which Damsgaard was charged there existed a state statute covering the same subject matter as the ordinance; *624 that persons charged with violating the statute were entitled to a jury trial; and that it thus being the established mode of procedure to grant such trials as a matter of right when the ordinance was passed that right could not be impaired, and persons charged with a violation of the subsequently passed ordinance were entitled to a jury trial as a matter of right.
Prosecution and conviction for an offense violating an ordinance does not bar a prosecution of the same act by indictment under a state statute. State v. Lee,
"Broadly speaking, acts were dealt with summarily which did not offend too deeply the moral purposes of the community, which were not too close to society's danger, and were stigmatized by punishment relatively light."
The offense with which Damsgaard is charged is of just such a nature. It is a matter of local concern. State v. Hughes, *625
Respondent contends that because of the nature of the punishment provided for violations of the ordinance in question it cannot be classed as a petty offense, but must be considered to be of such a serious nature as to entitle alleged violators to a jury trial. The punishment prescribed in the ordinance is a fine of not exceeding $100 or imprisonment for not over 90 days. On this particular point it is only necessary to refer to a recent case before the United States Supreme Court in which a similar claim was made and in which the maximum imprisonment for the offense involved was 90 days. District of Columbia v. Clawans,
This disposes of respondent's claims. It follows that he should be restrained from granting jury trials in this class of cases.
Writ made absolute.
*1