NCJ Number
15825
Journal
Northwestern University Law Review Volume: 68 Issue: 3 Dated: (JULY-AUGUST 1973) Pages: 566-584
Date Published
1973
Length
19 pages
Annotation
DISCUSSION OF THE PROCEDURAL IMBALANCES CAUSED BY THE PROSECUTION OF FINE-ONLY MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES UNDER THE RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE.
Abstract
DUE TO THIS QUASI-CRIMINAL DESIGNATION OF ORDINANCES, THE MUNICIPALITY HAS BEEN GRANTED THE CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT POWER TO ARREST AND DETAIN UNTIL TRIAL ANYONE CHARGED WITH THE VIOLATION OF A FINE-ONLY ORDINANCE. THE ACCUSED, HOWEVER, HAS BEEN DENIED THE PROCEDURAL RIGHTS AFFORDED THE CRIMINAL DEFENDANT, ESPECIALLY THE RIGHT TO A 'SPEEDY TRIAL.' IN ADDITION, THE STATE CRIMINAL CODE AND MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES OFTEN OVERLAP, THUS GIVING LOCAL ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS THE OPTION OF PROSECUTING UNDER A LOOSER PROCEDURE AND STANDARD OF PROOF IF THEIR CASE IS WEAK, SUGGESTED REFORM MEASURES INCLUDE SETTING UP A SEPARATE CODE OF ORDINANCE PROCEDURE WHICH WOULD BE NEITHER CIVIL NOR CRIMINAL, TREATING ALL FINE-ONLY ORDINANCE PROSECUTIONS AS CIVIL ACTIONS, AND TREATING THE ORDINANCE PROSECUTION AS A FULLY CRIMINAL PROCEEDING. OTHER PROPOSALS INCLUDE HAVING THE STATE PRECLUDE LOCAL ORDINANCES FROM IMPOSING SANCTIONS ON BEHAVIOR COVERED BY THE CRIMINAL CODE, AND ESTABLISHING SEPARATE CIVIL-TYPE AND CRIMINAL-TYPE ORDINANCE CATEGORIES. THIS LAST ALTERNATIVE WOULD PROVIDE INCENTIVE FOR A MUNICIPALITY TO DECIDE WHETHER AN ORDINANCE WILL BE CIVIL OR CRIMINAL BASED ON WHETHER IT WANTED TO RETAIN THE POWER OF ARREST UNDER THE ORDINANCE.