ÿWPC U‘b úfè"SN“°þÂôíNé84Q”ö®d°þ7®š ÈbÑCq®&¾ÿá‚”¦ZzÊ~Û?>Èœ‰ZsÅ×Z‰·4ðñS¼á •¨àúýÑô.[÷ÔfSŠO'L‘ëV§ÃÄm^¦t,c†Ã4@Ez1¼Ü·'™!í=SÊýûî†ü(åV Õ`=‹°J5‹Wçé&û¿©TïWß\ªm9çNðå9PäÁÝQr:Ñ™=?î˜lBŒ„¦ßò**C}:«– äI0ºw¸j“†9 ÛÖgÞ\…8ußO—Ҵ¦EáEõ$â²f_9\~'|.uÀ”¹AÚvÕå•¶Q¦i£Ã0‹[ôÌìeþ¬µ"ì(ªÎ_M×Án¢˜Š^Þˆ7yØWÞ–°‘¢Œq»ÜBN ú|ìÛ#ʯšKüÓ(B(áÁ|ªê‰ü:AjPú8€Äùë F©Èd‹Ÿ•EëU¯þ]]ÎˉwcbŒ 7g¥ûÚò¸Uº¿x¨WZisZA[‹›le¸4í’…q&ÉÏÚ¾¨¤B¼c­í«`}Jîî*¨æº@"Ÿ«=Y˜z}wÓˆ2ÇO<ùý+o<ÆŽJ‰ÝM 4¦GÅ~)# >UNI %— 0(w@Å4L(U:t®¶f¾ 0¶$ 0DÚU:¾XU: ‰P ‰Ù 0Db ¦ U:¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ AQâ Æ3 0Dù B= 0DZZ D/žž BÍ D3ê˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLlÎ(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ <g= î>U?@gAgBCDÓ€N n~<$x3|xNC:\OFFICE\WPWIN\TEMPLATE\STANDARD.WPT, øð AZ"Arial Regular \Ñ\R AØ'ÿ Legal\Ñ(f(2±¸$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÓ  ÓÔ€X ÌXXXÔÔ€ô³ÆôXX ÌÔà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó, øð AZ‹"Arial Regular ´Ý ƒ ™¿$ÝÓ  ÓÔ€X°mXXXÔÔ€ôµ£ôXX°mÔà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝButler€asserts€that€the€City€violated€the€procedural€rules€of€section€13„105€and€that€said€failureÐ ° Ðð ðconstitutes€an€alteration€of€Municipal€Code€Section€Titles€13€and€17€so€as€to€deprive€Appellant€of€substantiveÏrights€of€notice€and€due€process.ðð€However,€section€13„105€only€applies€when€a€person€violates€the€provisionsÏof€sections€13„102,€13„103,€or€13„107.€Of€these€sections,€Butler€was€only€charged€with€a€violation€of€sectionÏ13„103.€Therefore,€we€address€this€due€process€argument€only€as€it€relates€to€section€13„103.€, øð AZ‹"Arial Regular Ñ#€ i òÿÿd#ÑÑ\R AØ'ÿ Legal\Ñ Ñ#€  Xÿÿd#ÑÑ\R AØ'ÿ Legal\Ñ(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý øÝ ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€XXXXÔÔ€^5XXÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XX^5ÔÐ  ÐÌJuly€15,€1999ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular !#%Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý d($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó'''÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd""""'ÿÿdxdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýñ@ñ›ñ@ñÔ€ Xà/XXXÔñ@ñÑ€ †Ñ›ñ@ñÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑñ<ñÑ7€\ÒXXdðdÈ7Ñ›ñ<ñÓ  Óñ<ñÑ7€,XXdðXXdð7Ññ<ññAññ@ñÑ€_ÈÑñ@ññAññAñÑ€æ:ÑñAññDñ›ñDññ=ññ=ññDññDññ=ññ=ññNññDñßr€(<,(j 8` `€€@Eȱ` 8ttxP°ð  rßñDññNññNññNññNññDñ›ñDññNññ=ññ=ññNññNññNññ=ñ›ñ=ññNññNñ›ñNññ=ñà@g g ìàò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÌñ=ññNññNññ=ññ=ññNññNññ=ñà@bb%ìàAT€JACKSONˆÌñ=ññNññNññ=ññ=ññNñœßt€(>.*jx’€` `€€@EL` 8ttxP„( € tß›ñNññ=ñÌÌCITY€OF€JACKSON,à  àà h àà À à)€€Ð pÀ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ìà  àà ` àó óPlaintiff/Appellee,à h àà À àò ò)€€Madison€Circuit€No.€97„727Ð P   Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)€ÌVS.à  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)€€Appeal€No.€02A01„9812„CV„00381Ð 0 € Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)ÌJEFF€BUTLER,à ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ð `  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ìà  àà ` àó óDefendant/Appellant.à À àò ò)ó óÐ ð@  ÐÌÌà@··ìàAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CIRCUIT€COURT€OF€MADISON€COUNTYˆÌà@àà ìàAT€JACKSON,€TENNESSEEˆÌà@y y ìàTHE€HONORABLE€FRANKLIN€MURCHISON,€JUDGEˆÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌò òJEFFREY€BUTLER,€pro€seó óÐ  p ÐJackson,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€AppellantÌÌÌÌò òC.€MARK€DONAHOEÐ À! ÐSPRAGINS,€BARNETT,€COBB€&€BUTLER,€PLCó óÐ °"  ÐJackson,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€AppelleeÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌò òAFFIRMED€IN€PART,€REVERSED€IN€PARTÐ ,`'* ÐAND€REMANDEDÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌó óà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àò òALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€J.Ð €4Ð/3 ÐÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌDAVID€R.€FARMER,€J.ÌÌñ=ññDññ=ñÑæ:ÑÑ7€ à/ XXdðXXdð7ÑÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ  ÑÑæ:ÑÑ#€  Xÿÿd#ÑÑ\R AØ'ÿ Legal\ÑÑ  Ññ=ññDññ=ñHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€J.œñ=ññ=ññ:ñò òñ:ññ=ñà h àñ>ñÐ ññDññ>ñÑæ:ÑÑ7€ °m XXdðXXdð7ÑÑTR[¨ AØ'ÿ Legal[¨ AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ  Ññ>ññDññAññ>ñÑ_ÈÑÑ7€ ƒ òòdÈXXdð7ÑÑTR[¨ AØ'ÿ Legal[¨ AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ  Ññ>ññAññ@ññ>ñÑ †ÑÑTR[¨ AØ'ÿ Legal[¨ AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ  Ññ>ññ@ññ?ñÓÓñ?ññ>ñà  àñ>ñó óJeffrey›€Butler€(ð ðButlerðð€or€ð ðAppellantðð)€appeals€from€the€ñ>ñÑ †ÑÑTR[¨ AØ'ÿ Legal[¨ AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ  Ññ>ñtrial€courtððs€order€finding€thatÐ ° ÐButler€was€in€violation€of€the€œhealth€and€sanitation€code€of€the€City›€œof€Jackson€(ð ðCityðð€orÏð ðAppelleeðð).Ìò òÌà@Î Î ìàòòI.€Factual€and€Procedural€HistoryóóˆÐ 0 € ÐÌà  àó óAfter€receiving€complaints€about€the€premises€at€126€Wilkinson€in€Jackson,Ð ð@  ÐTennessee,€the€Health€and€Sanitation€Department€of€the€City€of€Jackson€(ð ðCityðð€orÏð ðAppelleeðð)€instituted€an€investigation€at€that€address€in€July€of€1997.ÌÌà  àOn€July€16,€1997,€pursuant€toò ò€ó óJackson€City€Code€section€13„105,›€a€letter€issuedÐ pÀ Ðfrom€Code€Enforcement€Officer€Rickey€Brown€to€the€Appellant,€notifying€him€that€he€wasÏin€violation€of€œthe€Official€Code€of€€the€City€of€Jackson€sections›€13„103,€13„104,€13„105,Ïand€17„105.€When€Butler€failed€to€take€any€action,€two€citations€were€issued.€The€firstÏcitation,€issued€July€31,€1997,€charged€Butler€with€violating€City€Code€13„202.€The€secondÏcitation,€issued€August€1,€1997,€€charged€Butler€with€violating€City€œCode›€œsections€13„103,›Ï13„104,€13„105,€and€œ17„105.Ì›Ìà  àCode€Enforcement€Officer€Rickey€Brown€based€the€citations€on€his€observation€ofÏweeds,€vines,€stacks€of€wood,€metal€parts,€automotive€parts,€motors,€automobiles,Ïscattered€papers€and€debris€located€in€the€front€and€back€yards€of€Butlerððs€œresidence.›ÏBrown€returned€in€August€of€1997€œand€on›€September€15,€1997,€and€found€the€property€inÏthe€same€condition.€Accompanying€him€on€September€15€was€the€Jackson„MadisonÏCounty€Environmental€Program€Director€and€Superintendent€of€the€City€of€Jackson€HealthÏand€Sanitation€Department,€Brent€Lewis.€œLewis›€observed€the€property€in€the€sameÏcondition€and€a€videotape€and€photographs€were€made€at€that€time€and€later€submitted€intoÏevidence.€Officer€Jerry€West€observed€the€same€œviolations,›€and€additionally€junk€œcars,›€andÏcaused€the€citations€for€the€cars€to€œissue.ò òÐ P7 26 ЛÐ 09€48 Ðñ;ñÑ †ÑÑTR[¨ AØ'ÿ Legal[¨ AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ  Ññ;ñà  àó óOn€August€18,€1997,€Butler€responded€to€the€summons€at€the€City€of€Jackson€CityÐ ° ÐCourt.€Thereafter€a€trial€ensued,€resulting€in€a€judgment€against€Butler€in€the€amount€ofÏ$250.00.€Butler€appealed€the€matter€to€circuit€court.€œò òÐ pÀ ЛÌà  àó óOn€May€8,€1998,€the€circuit€court€conducted€a€de€novo€hearing.€The€trial€court€foundÐ 0 € ÐButler€to€be€in€violation€of€City€œCode›€œsections€13„103,›€13„104,€13„105,€13„202€and€17„105Ïand€imposed€a€fine€of€$250.00.€The€trial€court€found€that€there€had€been€some€clean€upÏof€the€yard€since€the€citations€were€issued.€Accordingly,€the€œtrial€court›€ordered€the€city€toÏsend€Butler€a€new€letter€informing€him€of€what€must€be€done€to€bring€the€property€up€toÏcode.€The€œtrial€court›€further€held€that€Butler€would€then€have€œfifteen€(15)›€days€to€comply.ÏIf€Butler€did€not€comply,€the€City€would€be€allowed€œto›€clean€up€the€yard€at€the€expense€ofÏButler.€It€is€from€that€decision€that€Butler€appeals€to€this€Court.€ÌÌò òÓ  ÓòòII.€Warrantless€SearchÐ ` ÐÓ  ÓÌÓ  Óà  àóóó óButlerððs€first€contention€on€appeal€is€that€the€administrative€search€of€his€residenceÐ Ð  Ðwas€warrantless€and€in€violation€of€Butlerððs€Fourth€Amendment€rights.€Butler€bases€this€onÏtestimony€by€Brent€Lewis€that,€in€order€to€view€the€condition€of€Butlerððs€yard,€Rickey€Brown,ÏCode€Enforcement€Officer,€and€Lewis€had€to€climb€onto€the€back€of€a€truck€bed€and€lookÏover€the€fence€into€the€yard.€Butler€argues€that€the€code€officer€œfirst€should›€œhave›€obtainedÏa€search€warrant€for€this€administrative€search.€Butler€contends€that€the€warrantless€searchÏrenders€all€of€the€œevidence›€upon€which€the€citations€were€based,€fruit€of€the€poisonous€tree,Ïand€such€evidence€should€have€been€suppressed€by€the€trial€œcourt.Ì›Ìà  àThe€City€counters€that€violations€of€municipal€ordinances€are€considered€a€civil€andÏnot€a€criminal€proceeding.€While€not€explicitly€stated€by€the€City,€the€œimplication›€œis›€that€theÏexclusionary€rule€does€not€apply€in€civil€matters.€œÌ›Ìà  àIt€is€true€that€cases€involving€violation€of€city€ordinances€are€not€criminalÐ 09€48 Ðñ<ñÑ †ÑÑTR[¨ AØ'ÿ Legal[¨ AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ  Ññ<ñprosecutions.€Such€cases€are€civil€in€nature€having€as€their€object€the€vindication€ofÏdomestic€regulations.€òòCity€of€Chattanooga€v.€Meyersóó,€787€S.W.2d€921,€922€(Tenn.€1990)Ð à Ðñ>ñÑ †ÑÑTR[¨ AØ'ÿ Legal[¨ AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ  Ññ>ñ(òòcitingóó€òòBriggs€v.€City€of€Union€Cityóó,€531€S.W.2d€106,€107€(Tenn.€œ1975)).€›€Such€cases€areÐ pÀ Ðgoverned€by€rules€in€civil€cases.€òòMeyersóó€at€922€(òòciting€óóòòMetropolitan€Government€v.€Allenóó,Ð P   Ð529€S.W.2d€699,€707€(Tenn.€1975)).€œÌ›Ìà  àWhile€it€has€been€held€that€the€exclusionary€rule€generally€does€not€apply€to€a€civilÏproceeding,€it€is€usually€held€that€the€rule€applies€to€a€civil€proceeding€which€is€quasi„¼criminal€in€nature,€or€in€which€the€government€is€seeking€to€exact€a€penalty€or€in€some€wayÏpunish€a€person.€31A€C.J.S.€òòEvidenceóó€ðð253€(1996).€òòSee€also€óóòòAdamson€v.€C.I.R.óó,€œ745›€F.2dÐ à Ð541€œ(1984);›€òòVander€Linden€v.€U.S.óó,€502€F.Supp.€693€œ(1980);òò›€óóòòMcDaniel€v.€City€of€Seattleóó,Ð pÀ Ð828€P.2d€81€œ(1992);›€òòU.S.€v.€Moddes,€Inc.óó,€787€F.Supp.€1466€œ(1992).›€Therefore,€theÐ P  Ðexclusionary€rule€may€be€available€to€suppress€illegally€obtained€evidence€in€a€ordinanceÏviolation€œhearing.Ì›Ìà  àHowever,€we€expressly€decline€to€address€œwhether€the€search€violated€ButlerððsÏrights›€as€Butler€made€no€objection€to€the€admissibility€of€the€evidence€at€the€trial€court,€norÏdid€he€file€any€prior€motion€to€suppress€the€evidence€nor€a€motion€in€limine€to€prevent€theÏevidence€from€being€admitted.€While€we€grant€Butler€some€leeway€as€a€pro€se€litigant,€theÏjob€of€the€Court€of€Appeals€is€to€address€any€errors€made€at€the€trial€court€below.€ThisÏissue€was€neither€raised€nor€considered€in€the€trial€court,€and€cannot€be€raised€for€the€firstÏtime€on€appeal.€T.R.A.P.€36;€€òòSimpson€v.€Frontier€Community€Credit€Unionóó,€810€S.W.2dÐ ,`'* Ð147€(Tenn.€1991).à ¸ à€ò òòòÐ ð-@), ÐÌÓ  ÓIII.€Penalty€ImposedÌóóó óÓ  ÓÌÓ  Óà  àThe€trial€court€ordered€Butler€to€pay€a€fine€of€$250.00€for€the€violations€of€the€cityÏordinances.€Additionally,€the€trial€court€ordered€Butler€to€bring€his€residence€œinto›Ïcompliance€with€the€Code,€with€the€condition€that€if€he€was€not€in€compliance€within€œfifteenÐ 09€48 Ð(15)›€days,€the€City€œwould›€clean€up€the€yard€at€Butlerððs€expense,€plus€a€twenty„five€percentÏsurcharge€as€authorized€by€œsection€13„105.›€The€trial€court€issued€the€fine€under€theÏœgeneral›€œpenalty›€provision€of€the€Code.€The€œgeneral›€œpenalty›€provision€provides€in€pertinentÏpart:ÌñAñœñAñÓÓÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒSection€5.€Penalty€Clause.€Wherever€in€the€municipal€code,Ïincluding€the€codes€and€ordinances€adopted€by€reference,€anyÏact€is€prohibited€or€is€made€or€declared€to€be€unlawful€or€anÏoffense€or€a€misdemeanor,€or€wherever€in€the€municipal€codeÏthe€doing€of€any€act€is€required€or€the€failure€to€do€any€act€isÏdeclared€to€be€unlawful,€the€violation€of€any€such€provision€ofÏthe€municipal€code€shall€be€punishable€by€a€penalty€of€notÏmore€that€five€hundred€dollars€($500.00),€where€no€specificÏpenalty€is€otherwise€provided,€and€costs€for€each€separateÏviolation€.€.€.̛̜ÌÒ°` ž/ÒÒ°` /ÒÓ~/ÓñAñœñAñò òòòà  àó óóóThe€general€penalty€provision€can€be€applied€when€the€Code€has€been€violated€andÐ pÀ Ðno€specific€penalty€is€provided.€Butler€argues€that€œsection€13„105›€sets€forth€a€specificÏpenalty€and€therefore€it€was€error€for€the€court€to€use€the€general€penalty€provision€toÏimpose€a€fine€of€$250.00.€We€do€not€œagree.Ì›Ìà  àCity€Code€œsection›€13„105€contains€the€ð ðclean€upðð€provision€available€to€the€City.€ThisÏsection€authorizes€the€City€to€enter€onto€the€premises€of€an€offender€and€remove€anyÏaccumulation€of€garbage,€trash€and€rubbish,€and€cut€all€weeds€if€the€offender€does€notÏclean€up€the€premises€within€five€(5)€days€of€notice€of€the€violation.€The€œCode›€sectionÏstates€that€the€person€in€charge€of€the€premises€will€be€charged€the€actual€cost€of€suchÏremoval€plus€a€charge€of€twenty„five€(25)€percent.€The€œCode›€also€provides€that€suchÏproperty€shall€be€subject€to€a€lien€in€favor€of€the€City€until€all€such€charges€are€œpaid.Ì›Ìà  àWe€do€not€believe€that€this€is€the€type€of€€ð ðspecific€penaltyðð€envisioned€œby›€theÏdrafters€which€would€preclude€the€application€of€the€general€penalty€provision.€CodeÏsection€13„105€is€not€designed€to€be€a€penalty,€but€rather€allows€the€City€to€protect€theÏhealth,€safety,€and€welfare€of€its€citizens€by€bringing€property€in€compliance€with€the€codeÏwhen€the€offending€party€refuses€to€comply.€The€offending€party€is€charged€actual€cost€ofÏremoval€to€reimburse€the€City€for€the€œexpense.€While›€not€stated€in€the€Code,€the€twenty„fiveÐ 09€48 Ð(25)€percent€addition€to€the€charge€may€cover€administrative€expenses€and/or€may€serveÏto€deter€property€owners€from€using€the€City€as€their€personal€cleaning€service.€œÌ›Ìà  àAccordingly,€we€find€that€City€Code€œsection›€13„105€is€not€a€ð ðspecific€penaltyðð€for€theÏpurposes€of€the€general€penalty€provision€and€that€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€fining€ButlerÏunder€the€general€penalty€provision€in€addition€to€allowing€clean€up€by€the€œCity›€in€the€eventÏButler€fails€to€comply€with€the€Code.òòò òÐ ð@  ÐÌÓ  ÓIV.€Specific€Code€ViolationsÌÌÓ  Óó óóóà  àThe€trial€court€found€that€Butler€violated€City€Code€œsections›€13„103,€13„104,€13„Ð pÀ Ð105,€13„202,€and€17„105.€Butler€raises€several€issues€concerning€these€various€codeÏsections€including€allegations€that€the€City€did€not€meet€its€burden€of€proof€as€to€eachÏCode€violation.€We€shall€therefore€address€each€of€these€sections€in€œturn.Ì›Ìòòò òA.€City€Code€œsection›€13„103ó óóó.€à h àÐ Ð  Ðà  àCity€Code€œsection›€13„103€makes€it€unlawful€for€any€person€to€allow€weeds€orÏgrass€to€grow€to€a€height€in€excess€of€six€(6)€inches€on€property€owned€by€or€under€theÏcontrol€of€such€person.€Butler€argues€that€the€City€violated€the€procedural€rules€set€forthÏin€€œsection›€13„105€and€that€Butlerððs€due€process€rights€were€violated.œ×ƒ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×›€œÐ P( #& ЛÌà  àCity€Code€œsection›€13„105€directs€that€whenever€a€person€violates€the€provisionsÏof€sections€13„102,€13„103,€or€13„107,€the€recorder€shall€œmail€to›€the€person€havingÏcontrol€over€the€offending€premises€notice€of€the€violation.€The€Code€then€sets€forth€theÏlanguage€that€is€to€be€included€in€the€notice.€In€short,€the€notice€informs€the€person€thatÏthe€premises€have€been€found€to€be€in€an€€unsanitary,€unhealthy€and€unclean€œcondition,›Ð 3à.2 Ðand€directs€the€person€to€clean€up€the€premises€within€the€next€five€(5)€days.€The€noticeÏalso€informs€the€offending€party€that€if€he€or€she€fails€to€act€upon€such€directive,€the€œCity›Ïwill€enter€onto€the€property€and€remove€such€garbage,€etc,€and€charge€the€offendingÏparty€the€actual€cost€plus€twenty„five€(25)€percent.€œÌ›Ìà  àIn€contrast,€the€notice€sent€to€Butler€listed€the€specific€code€violations€and€statedÏas€follows:ÌÓ  ÓÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒÓÓThe€condition€of€property€under€your€control€violates€ð ðTheÏOfficial€Code€of€the€City€of€Jackson,€Tennesseeðð.€Property€andÏcode€violations€are€listed€above.ÌÌPlease€consider€this€letter€as€legal€notification€to€comply€withÏapplicable€codes€within€five€(5)€working€days.€Failure€to€complyÏwill€force€the€City€to€pursue€the€legal€remedies€identified€in€theÏCity€Code.ÌÌI€thank€you€in€advance€for€your€cooperation€in€this€matter.ÌÌÒ°` ÀAÒÒ°` ²AÒÓÎAÓÓ¦AÓButler€argues€that€the€Cityððs€failure€to€send€the€notice€required€by€œsection›€13„105Ïviolated€his€due€process€rights.€We€do€œnot€find€that€›€the€Cityððs€failure€to€send€the€noticeÏrequired€under€œsection›€13„105€violated€Butlerððs€due€process€rights€under€theÏcircumstances€of€this€œcase.Ì›Ìà  àThe€notice€sent€by€the€City€to€Butler€was€sufficient€to€place€Butler€on€notice€thatÏhe€was€in€violation€of€the€City€Code.€When€Butler€failed€to€comply€with€said€CodeÏprovisions,€the€City€issued€a€citation€and€Butler€was€afforded€a€hearing€before€anyÏpunitive€measures€were€imposed.€However,€if€Butler€failed€to€comply€with€the€noticeÏwhich€was€sent,€and€the€City€chose€instead€to€enter€onto€the€property€five€days€laterÏand€perform€the€clean€up,€this€holding€might€have€been€different.€Before€the€City€mayÏavail€itself€of€the€clean€up€remedy€found€in€œsection›€13„105,€it€should€issue€the€noticeÏmandated€by€that€section€to€ensure€the€offending€party€is€fully€informed€of€the€CityððsÏclean€up€procedure€and€the€charges€and€consequences€to€the€offending€party€of€non„¼compliance.€œÌ›ÌÓ  Óà  àButler€also€asserts€that€the€City€did€not€meet€its€burden€of€proof€as€to€this€œCode›Ð  :p59 Ðsection€as€it€did€not€prove€that€the€property€was€ð ðunder€the€controlðð€of€Butler,€as€requiredÏby€œsection›€13„103.€Upon€a€careful€reading€of€the€transcript,€we€find€that€the€City€did€proveÏthat€the€property€was€under€Butlerððs€control.€Butler€testified€that€he€had€the€ability€to€sayÏwho€comes€and€goes.€When€questioning€Butler€about€a€videotape€which€was€played€forÏthe€court,€counsel€for€the€œCity›€stated€to€Butler,€ð ðItððs€the€yard€where€you€live€and€you€haveÏcontrol€of€the€property,€right?€Butler€responded,€ð ðThatððs€kind€of€obvious,€isnððt€it?ðð€TakingÏinto€account€that€Butler€was€rather€uncooperative€in€answering€questions€posed€by€counselÏfor€the€City,€we€find€the€testimony€of€Butler€sufficient€to€show€he€was€in€control€of€theÏproperty€at€issue.€œÌÌà  àFor€all€of€the€above€noted€reasons,›€we€hold€that€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€findingÏButler€to€be€in€violation€of€City€Code€œsection›€œ13„103.Ì›Ìò òòòB.€City€Code€œsection›€13„104Ð ` Ðóóó óà  àCity€Code€œsection›€13„104€makes€it€unlawful€for€any€owner€of€record€of€real€propertyÐ ð@ Ðto€create,€maintain,€or€permit€to€be€maintained€on€such€property€the€growth€of€trees,€vines,Ïgrass,€underbrush€and/or€the€accumulation€of€debris,€trash,€litter,€or€garbage.€In€contrastÏto€œsection›€13„103€which€applies€to€the€property€owner€or€the€person€in€control€of€theÏproperty,€œsection›€13„104€applies€only€to€the€owner€of€record€of€the€real€property.€œÌ›Ìà  àAt€trial,€Butler€testified€that€he€resides€at€126€Wilkinson€but€it€is€not€his€property.€TheÏCity€introduced€no€evidence€that€the€Butler€œis›€the€owner€of€record€of€this€property,€andÏmade€reference€to€the€fact€that€his€Wife€œis›€the€owner€of€the€property.€Accordingly,€as€aÏmatter€of€law,€Butler€could€not€violate€œsection›€13„104.€We€hold€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÏfinding€Butler€in€violation€of€City€Code€œsection›€œ13„104.Ì›€Ìòòò òC.€City€Code€œsection›€13„105ó óóóÐ p5À04 Ðà  àThe€trial€court€found€Butler€guilty€of€violating€œsection›€13„105.€As€mentionedÏhereinabove,€œsection›€13„105€is€a€remedial€section€which€directs€the€œCity›€to€send€notice€toÐ 09€48 Ðthe€offending€party,€authorizes€the€œCity›€to€make€removal€upon€failure€to€comply€with€notice,Ïand€authorizes€the€city€to€place€a€lien€on€the€property€until€all€such€charges€are€paid.ÏœAlthough›€this€is€the€only€section€that€speaks€to€the€clean€up€of€the€premises,€the€œCodeÏsection›€is€not€worded€to€make€a€failure€to€clean€up€a€separately€chargeable€offense.ÏRather,€it€provides€the€remedy€available€to€the€City€if€the€offending€party€refuses€to€cleanÏup€the€premises.€œÌ›Ìà  àThe€other€œCode›€sections€found€in€Title€13€which€Butler€was€charged€with€violatingÏbegin€with€the€language€ð ðIt€shall€be€unlawful€for€.€.€.ðð€In€contrast,€œsection›€13„105€(1)€begins,Ïð ðWhenever€a€person€violates€the€provisions€of€sections€13„102,€13„103,€or€13„107,€theÏrecorder€shall€mail€.€.€.ðð€Subsection€(2)€begins€ð ðOn€failure€to€comply€with€the€notice€as€setÏout€above€.€.€.the€city€shall€.€.€.ðð€Subsection€(3)€begins,€ð ðUntil€all€such€charges€prescribedÏby€this€section€are€paid€.€.€.ðð€Finally,€subsection€(4)€begins,€ð ðThe€remedy€contained€in€thisÏsection€shall€not€be€the€exclusive€remedy€.€.€.ðð€€We€find€that€such€language€sets€forth€theÏremedy€available€to€the€city€upon€a€violation€of€the€code.€œÌ›Ìà  àWe€believe€City€Code€œsection›€13„105€was€enacted€to€authorize€the€œCity›€to€enterÏonto€such€premises€and€bring€them€in€compliance€with€the€œCode›€to€ensure€the€health€andÏsafety€of€the€community.€Without€such€a€statute,€the€œCity›€could€fine€the€offending€party,€butÏwould€not€be€able€to€remedy€the€situation€if€the€offending€party€refused€to€comply,€therebyÏjeopardizing€the€health€and€safety€of€the€community.€City€Code€œsection›€13„105€does€notÏcreate€a€separately€chargeable€offense.€Accordingly,€we€find€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÏfinding€Butler€in€violation€of€City€Code€œsection€13„105.ñAñ›ñAñÌ›Ìò òòòD.€City€Code€œsection›€13„202óóó óÐ °1-0 Ðà  àButler€was€charged€with€violation€of€City€Code€œsection›€13„202€in€a€separate€citation.ÏThe€trial€court€found€Butler€to€be€in€violation€of€this€œCode›€section.€City€Code€œsection›€13„202Ïmakes€it€unlawful€to€park,€store,€or€leave,€or€to€permit€the€parking€or€storing€of€any€licensedÏor€unlicensed€motor€vehicle€of€any€kind,€for€a€period€in€excess€of€ten€(10)€days,€when€suchÐ 09€48 Ðvehicle€is€in€a€state€of€disrepair€and€incapable€of€moving€under€its€own€power€œupon›€anyÏprivate€property€within€the€city,€unless€the€same€is€completely€enclosed€within€a€buildingÏor€unless€it€is€in€connection€with€a€business€enterprise€operated€in€a€lawful€place€andÏœmanner.Ì›Ìà  àButler€argues€that€the€citation€issued€by€Officer€Jerry€West€is€on€its€face€invalid€sinceÏthe€œCityððs›€cause€of€action€could€not€have€matured€on€the€date€of€the€citation,€July€31,€1997.ÏButler€contends€that€Officer€West€first€investigated€the€matter€on€July€31,€1997.€AsÏœsection13„202›€refers€to€vehicles€which€have€been€parked,€stored€or€left€in€excess€of€tenÏdays,€the€earliest€possible€date€on€which€Officer€West€could€have€had€the€requisiteÏknowledge€of€the€violation€was€August€10,€œ1997.Ì›Ìà  àCity€Code€œsection›€13„204€states€that€there€should€be€reasonable€grounds€to€believeÏthat€a€violation€of€the€chapter€exists.€It€appears€that€reasonable€grounds€existed€on€JulyÏ31,€1997€for€Officer€West€to€believe€Butler€was€in€violation€of€œsection›€13„202.€Officer€WestÏtestified€that€he€investigated€Butlerððs€yard€due€to€a€vehicle€complaint.€He€took€photographsÏof€eight€vehicles€parked€in€Butlerððs€yard.€He€testified€that€when€he€observed€the€vehiclesÏthey€appeared€to€have€been€sitting€there€a€long€time€with€trash€piled€œonñBñ€thatñBññCñ€themñCñ.›€Officer€WestÏtestified€that€in€his€opinion€the€vehicles€were€not€in€a€state€that€would€allow€them€to€beÏfunctional€and€they€were€covered€up€with€debris.€Officer€West€also€noted€on€the€citationÏthat€he€tried€to€contact€Butler€on€different€dates€at€least€six€times€with€no€results€inÏreference€to€the€vehicles.€œÌ›Ì€à  àOnce€there€œare›€reasonable€grounds€to€believe€that€a€violation€of€the€junked€vehiclesÐ Ð/ +. Ðchapter€of€the€œCode›€exists,€œsection›€13„204€directs€the€chief€of€police€to€give,€or€cause€toÏbe€given,€written€notice€to€the€offending€party€that€the€motor€vehicle€violates€the€provisionsÏof€said€chapter.€The€notice€shall€demand€that€the€motor€vehicle€be€removed€to€a€place€ofÏlawful€storage€within€ten€(10)€days€and€that€failure€to€remove€said€vehicle€and€abate€theÏnuisance€shall€constitute€a€violation€of€the€provisions€of€the€chapter.€Officer€West€sentÐ 09€48 ÐButler€such€notice€on€August€1,€œ1997.Ì›Ìà  àIt€appears€to€this€Court€that€Officer€West€should€have€waited€until€August€10,€1997Ïto€issue€the€citation.€However,€since€Butler€was€afforded€a€hearing€on€the€violation,€it€is€notÏthe€date€of€issuance€of€the€citation€upon€which€this€case€turns,€but€rather€the€finding€by€theÏcourt€that€Butler€was€in€violation€of€œsection›€13„202.€Had€Butler€complied€with€the€notice€andÏremoved€the€vehicles€within€ten€days€of€receiving€notice,€prior€to€his€first€court€hearing,ÏButler€could€not€have€been€found€to€be€in€violation€of€œsection›€13„202€since€it€allows€theÏoffending€party€ten€(10)€days€to€abate€said€œnuisance.Ì›Ìà  àButler€contends€that€the€aim€of€the€œCode›€provisions€on€junked€vehicles€is€theÏplacement€of€such€vehicles€in€a€manner€so€that€they€are€not€visible€from€the€street.€ButlerÏcites€œsection›€13„203€for€this€proposition.€City€Code€œsection›€13„203€deals€with€the€removalÏof€the€offending€vehicle€and€states€that€the€vehicle€shall€be€removed€to€a€place€of€lawfulÏstorage€or€housed€within€a€building€where€it€will€not€be€visible€from€the€street.€Butler€arguesÏthat€since€his€vehicles€were€located€within€a€fenced€area,€not€visible€from€the€street,€suchÏvehicles€fall€outside€the€intent€of€the€ordinance.€œÌ›Ìà  àAlthough€œsection›€13„203€contains€language€speaking€to€visibility€from€the€street,€weÏcannot€ignore€the€language€ð ðhoused€within€a€buildingðð€found€in€œsection›€13„203€andÏð ðcompletely€enclosed€within€a€buildingðð€found€in€œsection›€13„202.€City€Code€œsection›€13„201Ïsets€forth€the€purpose€of€the€code€section:ÌñAñœñAñÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒÓÓ13„201.€òòDeclaration€of€Purposeóó.€The€Council€finds€andÐ ð-@), Ðdeclares€that€the€accumulation€and€storage€of€motor€vehiclesÏin€a€state€of€disrepair€and€incapable€of€moving€under€their€ownÏpower€are€in€the€nature€of€rubbish€and€unsightly€debris,€andÏconstitute€a€nuisance€detrimental€to€the€health,€safety,€andÏwelfare€of€the€community€in€that€such€conditions€tend€toÏinterfere€with€the€enjoyment€of€and€reduce€the€value€of€privateÏproperty;€create€safety€and€health€hazards€to€minors€as€well€asÏadults,€interfere€with€the€comfort€and€well€being€of€the€publicÏand€create,€extend,€and€aggravate€urban€blight,€and€that€theÏpublic€health,€safety,€and€general€welfare€require€that€suchÏconditions€be€regulated,€abated,€and€prohibited.€œÌÌÒ°` ‰iÒÒ°` {iÒÓ—iÓWhile›€storage€of€said€vehicles€in€a€fenced€in€yard€may€address€some€of€the€aesthetic€goalsÐ  :p59 Ðof€this€section,€it€does€not€address€the€health€and€safety€concerns.€The€œCode›€states€thatÏsaid€vehicles€shall€be€completely€enclosed€within€a€building.€This€Court€finds€that€ButlerððsÏstorage€of€said€vehicles€in€a€fenced€in€yard€was€in€violation€of€the€œCode.ñAñ›ñAñÌ›Ìà  àFor€all€of€the€above€stated€reasons,€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€finding€Butler€inÏviolation€of€City€Code€œsection›€œ13„202.Ì›Ìòòò òE.€City€Code€œsection›€17„105Ð Ð  Ðó óóóà  àThe€final€code€provision€which€Butler€was€found€to€have€violated€is€City€CodeÐ ° Мsection›€17„105.€This€code€section€directs€that€all€garbage€and€refuse€be€removed€fromÏprivate€residences€twice€each€week€or€as€often€as€is€deemed€necessary€by€the€director.ÏœSection›€17„105(4)€further€directs€that€quantities€of€garbage€and€refuse€materials€resultingÏfrom€the€repair,€excavation,€construction€or€destruction€of€buildings€shall€be€removed€andÏdisposed€of€by€the€contractor,€owner€or€person€having€same€in€charge€by€a€methodÏsatisfactory€to€the€director€of€health€and€sanitation.€Butler€was€charged€with€a€violation€ofÏthis€œCode›€section€for€having€a€large€pile€of€lumber,€old€building€materials€and€debris€in€hisÏœyard.Ì›Ìà  àOther€than€the€general€arguments€addressed€earlier€in€this€opinion,€Butler€raised€noÏspecific€issues€on€appeal€relating€to€this€œCode›€violation.€We€find€that€the€evidence€supportsÏthe€trial€courtððs€finding€that€Butler€was€in€violation€of€City€Code€œsection›€17„105.€œÌ›Ìà  àIn€summary,€we€find€that€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€finding€Butler€in€violation€of€CityÏCode€œsections›€13„103,€13„202,€and€17„105.€However,€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€ButlerÏin€violation€of€City€Code€œsections›€13„104€and€13„105.€Under€the€general€penalty€provision,Ïthe€trial€court€may€impose€a€fine€of€no€more€than€five€hundred€dollars€($500.00)€for€eachÏviolation.€While€the€fine€of€$250.00,€imposed€by€the€trial€court€for€the€five€code€violations,Ïis€still€within€the€allowable€range,€this€Court€cannot€know€if€the€trial€court€would€haveÏimposed€the€same€fine€for€three€code€violations.€Therefore,€we€shall€remand€this€case€backÐ 09€48 Ðto€the€trial€court€for€a€new€œdetermination.›€The€portion€of€the€trial€courtððs€order€instructingÏButler€to€comply€with€the€City€Code€within€fifteen€(15)€days€shall€stand€unaffected.òòò òÐ à ÐÌà@PP$ìàV.€ConclusionˆÌÌó óóóÔ‡XPfXX XPfÔà  àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€hereby€affirmed€in€part,€reversed€in€part,€andÐ `  Ðremanded€for€determination€of€fine.€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€ñAñœñAñœone„half›€to€AppellantÏand€ñAñœñAñœone„half›€to€Appellee,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€œnecessary.Ô#† XPfXXXPfÚv#Ôòòò òÐ Ð  ÐñAñ›ñAñÌñAñ›ñAñÓÓà  àñAñ›ñAñà ` àñAñ›ñAñà ¸ àñAñ›ñAñà  àñAñ›ñAñà h àñAñ›ñAñà À àñAñ›ñAñà  àñAñ›ñAñà p àñAñ›ñAñÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àó ó€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð €Ð Ðóóà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àHIGHERS,€J.Ð pÀ ÐÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ ð@ ÐFARMER,€J.ÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ  #ð! ÐLILLARDñ8ññ7ñ,ñ7ññ8ññ9ñ,€J.ñ9ñòòò ò›à ` àóóó óÐ $à" Ðà  àÌ