Show RECORD JUMP IN INCOURT INCOURT COURT I I Judge Attorney Dininny Controversy Goes to Highest Tribunal ASSISTANT DALY BUSY Writ of e Dismissed and Matter Matta Ic II Taken Takes to toI the Supreme Court urt I Under a WIit lit of yee OM OMy y J I J 5 j ge sf f the criminal of the tbs city elty te to green Riven en th the tho alternative U of per the Ute city attorney or hU his ta as assistants I to to prosecute violations of the city eity ordinances or show how muse caUN OR on No November vember II why by they should be tie barred r hum from t poste ulie sours room in is the prof prot proffered feNd rul of ot tsar duttee dut u leap sad and d a bound the Judge Jude Attorney con COa II went from the district triet court to 0 the pone preme court OU the tho tugboat tri ut tribunal tribunal bunal of the state Before the matter wan wu taken taka lato late tile the supreme court I 1 j Daly t city attorney and nd acting rs ta of or tit t Sty ty Attorney H J I I appeared before Judge George G Arm Armstrong strong with a that the writ of ot certiorari proceedings l Instituted gatt Judge Whitaker about abolt ten lea leaday day da ago fro sad and which r reached the ta rt of the defendants answer be M The motion melon was wan wa greeted granted and aDd Mr lr Daly Day Immediately went weRt to the supreme court Murt chambers and pre pro presented seated the application for tor a writ of oC mandate which was wat granted by b the Ue higher court ft and aDd made returnable No Ne November e er vember r It le of I Attorney Arn The affair taken Into Inlo the supreme court and arising out of tb the prose prosecution cution of at one Virgil a va vagrant Vagrant a agrant grant will UI settle definitely the authority author authority ity it of et the U police pollee Judge Jude to exclude an official the Ute city elty prosecutor r and the power of the court to 0 appoint special prosecutors pr under such lIuch eases The Th matter of the application for tor the writ of mandate has bas been told several tiers t in 8 and aDd summed up briefly It 1 I It le lehat hat t while there in is I no DO statute in the tit i tate M t of Utah defining the duties of tile the city oily attorney the duties are pre prescribed prescribed prescribed scribed under a city ordinance under power lower granted the city government by bythe bythe the tile law laws Under this ordinance au authority the t be city elty attorney or his Ills as ac assistant slated hat has the power to institute the sary and prosecute pro CUte all an vio violations 10 lations of the city elt ordinances ordinance The application for tor the writ of man mandate mandate mandate date recites that on September 2 1910 1918 a complaint had bad been issued against Virgil McMahon by b some one ORe other than the city ely attorney aHome or uy o his assistants and aad that thereupon a controversy arose between the court Judge JUd 8 Whitaker and d the city attorney as all to who was wa qualified to issue a II complaint in the violation of an ordinance The court had held beW that any aaY one ape other othor titan tHan the city attorney attora had the right to Institute tute tole proceedings for tor violations of ot the Ibe el ordinances The Th statements filed dally daily dall with the I city elty court by Ity the Ibe city ell attorneys of fice tic lee announcing the readiness reAd of the totter outer te to try and IUd prosecute nil all n city eases ease are quoted in n the tho application and the statement talent IB le made that on seek It Judicial day tram from September Jl U up until til the IUt Ut day of October the city elty attorney by bin his assistant assistants has hu been weft present In the city court ready willing III II It and aDd prepared to prosecute all violations of city eity ordinances but that the Ille court has It refused to permit the city attorney or his bis assistants to prosecute prost Cute any aay caves cares It in is also aillo cited cUed that during durin this thin period cases have been prosecuted by b a number of specially appointed prosecutors not connected with the city elty attorneys office and among these are named E A Rogers Ro II Dana T Smith W II U Leary Ben Johnson and E K A Walton aiton Judge Slander Pat PatIt It U la also ablo set Nt out that the case calle has bas ba been disposed led of oC by b the de plea of guilty guilt on September Z 22 and his sentence of a floater ef eC disposed of the case On Oft October 28 21 8 the application avers aversa a demand was wa made upon Judge Whit Whitaker aker by the city eil attorney that the lat ter be not precluded from Crom performing the duties of his hi office in the city court and aDd that upon the tile service of th the demand dellla or notice that W S Dalton assistant city elt attorney be permitted to resume reume his court duties This demand was alii denied The prayer of the plaintiff In Jn the application for tor a writ of mandate is III that Judge J I J Whitaker be commanded com commanded Uto to permit the plaintiff and I his hi assistants to prosecute violations of city ordinances ordinance in said Hid court and to refrain retrain from interfering with the plaintiff and his hi assistants in the prosecution Cutton of raid ald caves cases a aThe The alternative writ of mandate granted by lIy the supreme court reciting leg ing In fully the application commands command and enjoins that the defendant Judge J J I Whitaker either permit the city attorney or his assistants to prosecute violations of oC the city ordinances in the city court and aDd to refrain from Inter Interfering interfering fering Cering with such office in la the prosecution tion of such lIuch cases or to show how cause to tho contrary on November 18 19 With lith this action of the supreme court in the granting of the writ of mandate the writ rit of certiorari pro Iro proceedings in the district court are arf dropped although the writ of p ohi brought before Judge Jud e Morse More is still pending The contempt ad iRga inga in which City lIt Attorney Dininny was sentenced to serve one day in ail all by b Judge Whitaker and which has hae been stayed under the writ of prohibition bitten are not brought Into the su st supreme J preme court proceedings the Ute sole purpose pur purpose pose of ot the latter laHer being to determine the authority of the city dt court to ex exclude exclude exclude clude the city attorneys attorney S office octlee from the exercise of UK its It duties and the right of the court to t substitute special prose prosecutors prosecutors for those thoM appointed by b the city The matter was all taken into the supreme su supreme suo preme court by b the city attorneys office of at office fice to save ave delay dela it is III said |