Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham

149 So. 2d 921, 42 Ala. App. 1, 1962 Ala. App. LEXIS 149
CourtAlabama Court of Appeals
DecidedOctober 23, 1962
Docket6 Div. 856
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 149 So. 2d 921 (Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Alabama Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, 149 So. 2d 921, 42 Ala. App. 1, 1962 Ala. App. LEXIS 149 (Ala. Ct. App. 1962).

Opinion

CATES, Judge.

Shuttlesworth was found guilty under § 856 of the City Code of Birmingham for interfering with the chief of police in the latter’s taking certain Freedom Riders into “protective custody.”

Taking into protective custody we consider to mean the receiving of some one who places himself voluntarily under the protection of a peace officer.

Outside the bus station was a crowd of some 250 to 300 shouting for the police to give way, to let them take care of the Freedom Riders en route to Montgomery who, on the walkout of bus drivers, were stranded in Birmingham. The crowd was trying to press forward toward the bus loading [2]*2platform. Streets were blocked — Nineteenth entirely; Seventh Avenue between Eighteenth and Nineteenth.

Shuttlesworth has argued to us that the chief of police was not in the discharge of any legal duty. Harris v. City of Tuscaloosa, 21 Ala.App. 392, 108 So. 768, does not apply here; nor are People v. Papp, 19 Misc.2d 331, 185 N.Y.S.2d 907, and White v. Edmunds [1790], Peake 123, in point.

This argument can avail the appellant nothing, because his conduct was also that prohibited by § 825 of the City Code which provides for the same degree of punishment as § 856, § 825 making it an offense against the City for any person to commit an assault.1 Andersen v. United States, D. C.Mun.App., 132 A.2d 155; affirmed 253 F.2d 335. See Duncan v. Jones [1936], 1 K.B. 218.

The definition of assault is well known from the common law. In Kennedy v. State, 39 Ala.App. 676, 107 So.2d 913, we had occasion to consider some of the elements of resisting arrest.

There may be a species of resisting an officer without at the same time committing an assault. Cf. Dist. Col. v. Little, 339 U.S. 1, 70 S.Ct. 468, 94 L.Ed. 599; Innes v. Wylie [1844], 1 Car. & Kir. 257; Patterson v. City of Sylacauga, 40 Ala.App. 239, 111 So. 2d 25. But under the wording of § 856 opposing or interfering or hindering are alternatives to resistance, so that it is our view that an assault is an offense included in § 856 in the alternative here pertinent.

Inasmuch as Shuttlesworth blocked the chief’s path using words from which the intent to do so “in rudeness or in anger” could probably and rationally be inferred, there was no error in his conviction, since he could have been clearly convicted of a simple assault. The judgment below is due to be

Affirmed.

PRICE, P. J., and JOHNSON, J., concur in result.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Jackson v. City of Muscle Shoals
291 So. 2d 162 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1974)
Hopkins v. State
286 So. 2d 920 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 1973)
Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham
178 So. 2d 178 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1965)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
149 So. 2d 921, 42 Ala. App. 1, 1962 Ala. App. LEXIS 149, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shuttlesworth-v-city-of-birmingham-alactapp-1962.