Dallas jury rules against Bob Groden.

[Drew Phipps]

I'd like to point out that the municipal court's ruling which was upheld on appeal did not directly address the constitutionality of Groden's arrest. The ruling was merely that Dealy Plaza wasn't mentioned as a "park" in the city ordinances, and therefore the ordinance that prohibited selling on a "park" without a permit didn't apply.

I note that the City has 2 ordinances under which it might charge Groden, the "Vendor's" ordinance (under which he might have a legal defense) and the "Sale of Merchandise" ordinance (under which he does not have a legal defense). The City of Dallas has cited Groden 80 times (including this one) for violating the "Sale" ordinance and always loses. (Presumably this is because Dealy Plaza is not included in the areas specified under the "Sale" ordinance.)

I don't know if Groden's lawyer alleged or proved the 80 systematic and incorrect abuse of the ordinances, as part of his proof that Groden's arrest was unconstitutional. If not, he should have. If he did, and the jury didn't bite, that's just the way the lawsuit crumbles.

BTW a nine hour arrest on a Class C (fine only) misdemeanor is not unconstitutional in and of itself (it's not even that rare). But a systematic harassment of him would be.