Case Name: CITY OF EUGENE, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Micaelah Vicentia FAEROLD, Defendant-Appellant.
Court: Court of Appeals of Oregon
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 2019-01-03
Citations: 432 P.3d 394
Docket Number: A165664
Parties: CITY OF EUGENE, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
Micaelah Vicentia FAEROLD, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before Hadlock, Presiding Judge, and DeHoog, Judge, and Aoyagi, Judge.
Reporter: Pacific Reporter 3d
Volume: 432
Pages: 394–395

Head Matter:
CITY OF EUGENE, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
Micaelah Vicentia FAEROLD, Defendant-Appellant.
A165664
Court of Appeals of Oregon.
Submitted November 2, 2018.
January 3, 2019
Micaelah Vincentia Faerold filed the brief pro se.
Travis Smith and Suzanne M. Bruce, filed the brief for respondent.
Before Hadlock, Presiding Judge, and DeHoog, Judge, and Aoyagi, Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Defendant, who was convicted of second-degree animal neglect in the Eugene Municipal Court, appealed to the circuit court where she was again convicted after a trial de novo . Defendant now appeals her conviction to this court. "Under ORS 221.360, when a defendant has been convicted in municipal court, and then convicted in circuit court following a trial de novo , we have jurisdiction to review the circuit court judgment only if the defendant is challenging the constitutionality of the ordinance he was convicted of violating." City of Eugene v. Smyth , 239 Or. App. 175, 181, 243 P.3d 854 (2010), rev. den. , 350 Or 230, 253 P.3d 1079 (2011) (emphasis added). Because, on appeal, defendant does not challenge the constitutionality of the ordinance she was convicted of violating, we do not have jurisdiction over this appeal and, accordingly, we dismiss.
Appeal dismissed.