
    (107 So. 221)
    HALL v. PHENIX CITY.
    (4 Div. 153.)
    (Court of Appeals of Alabama.
    Feb. 2, 1926.)
    ■Municipal corporations &wkey;>l 10 — Conviction, of violation of ordinance not published held error (Code 1923, § 1999).
    Judgment of conviction of violation of ordinance adopted by city of more than 3,000 population, and having newspaper of general circulation, which ordinance was not published as required by Code 1923, § 1999, nor before prosecution began, held error.
    Appeal from Circuit Court, Russell County; J. S. Williams, Judge.
    Charlie Hall was convicted of a violation of an ordinance of Phenix City, and he appeals.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Frank M. De Graffenried, of Seale, for appellant.
    The ordinance was not published as required, and the defendant was entitled to the affirmative charge. Code 1923, § 1999; Bell v. Town of Jonesboro, 3 Ala. App. 652, 57 So. 138.
    Roy L. Smith, of Phenix City, for appellee.
    Brief of counsel did not reach the Reporter.
   SAMFORD, J.

For the purposes of -a determination of this appeal it appears, from the record, that the city of Phenix City had at the time of the adoption of the ordinance here in question a population of more than 3,000, and at that time there was published a newspaper of general circulation in Phenix City, and it further affirmatively appears that the ordinance, the basis of this prosecution, was not published as required by section 1999 of the Code of 1923, nor was it so published before the beginning of the prosecution in this case. It follows that the judgment of the circuit court convicting defendant of a violation of said ordinance was error.

Other questions presented are not neeeásary to a decision; but, for the error pointed out, the judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded.

Reversed and remanded. 
      cg=>For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
     