City of Chicago v. Ross, 54 Ill. App. 3d 127

Summary

The Appellate Court of Illinois affirmed the conviction of Bertram Ross for operating a motion picture projector without a license, holding that the meter reading was sufficient because the equipment was designed for 35 amperes and was not exempt as non-professional. The court reversed the convictions of the other defendants because no evidence was presented against them absent a valid stipulation. The court declined to consider the city's authority to license projectionists because that issue was not raised at trial.

Holdings

1. There was no stipulation to apply the evidence against Ross to the other defendants; therefore, there was no evidence against them, and their convictions must be reversed.
2. The accuracy of the meter is irrelevant; the essential factor is the amount of electricity with which the projector is designed to operate. The projector was 35 ampere equipment, so the violation was established.
3. The 35 ampere equipment is not of the non-professional type ordinarily used in the home; therefore, it is not exempt.
4. The issue is waived because it was not raised in the trial court.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain Ross's conviction despite the lack of meter accuracy testing.
2. Whether the ordinance exempts the type of projector used by Ross.
3. Whether the City had authority to license motion picture projectionists (raised for the first time on appeal).
4. Whether the trial court properly applied evidence against the other defendants via stipulation.

Disposition

other