#### City of Chicago, Defendant in Error, v. Joseph Smith, Plaintiff in Error.

Gen. No. 21,111.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Frank H. Graham, Judge, presiding.

Heard in this court at the March term, 1915.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed November 15, 1915.

Statement of the Case.

Prosecution by the City of Chicago against Joseph Smith, defendant, in the Municipal Court of Chicago, charging defendant with a violation of section 2012 of the Revised Municipal Code of Chicago. To reverse a judgment of conviction and the assessment of a fine of two hundred dollars against defendant, defendant prosecutes this writ of error.

A. L. Williams, for plaintiff in error.

John W. Beckwith and Albert J. W. Appell, for defendant in error.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Mr. Justice Baker

delivered the opinion of the court.

*350Abstract of the Decision.

1. Criminal law, § 39 * —what is effect of appearance. Where, defendant in a criminal case appears and submits the ease to the court, the only question is whether defendant is guilty as charged, and in such case the facts relating to his arrest are immaterial.

2. Municipal corporation, § 863 * —when complaint for violating ordinance states single offense. A complaint under section 2012 of the Revised Municipal Code of Chicago, charging a violation of the ordinance, in that defendant “did make, aid, countenance and assist in making an improper noise, riot, disturbance, breach of the peace and diversion tending to a breach of the peace,” charges a single offense only, and is not a blanket complaint.