1. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS — Traffic Regulation — Within Boundaries Only — Violation — Lane of Street — Outside Boundary — No Jurisdiction. Under applicable statutes, a city has the power to regulate traffic by municipal ordinance within its boundary only; therefore, since the northbound lane of street forming city's eastern boundary was not within the boundary of the city, the municipal court of that city was without jurisdiction over traffic offenses committed there.
Opinion by JUDGE KELLY.
Defendant, City of Lakewood, appeals from a final order of the district court under Rule 106(a)(4) prohibiting the trial of a traffic offense in Lakewood municipal court. The traffic violation was allegedly committed by Svaldi in the northbound lane of Sheridan Boulevard in the City of Denver.
The basis for the trial court's judgment was that Lakewood had no jurisdiction beyond its territorial limits, it having been stipulated that the boundary line between Lakewood and Denver is the north-south center line of Sheridan Boulevard. We affirm.
On appeal, the City of Lakewood contends that a municipality has jurisdiction over the entire width of a street which is on, adjacent to, or traverses the boundary of the municipality. The argument is without merit.
[1] Municipal corporations are created by statute, and are confined to the specific powers granted by statute, which must be strictly construed. See Aurora v. Bogue, Jr., 176 Colo. 198, 489 P.2d 1295. Under § 31-12-101(20)(g), C.R.S. 1973, the City of Lakewood has the power to regulate traffic by municipal ordinance within its boundaries only. Cf. Pueblo v. Flanders, 122 Colo. 571, 225 P.2d 832. Since the northbound lane of Sheridan Boulevard is not within Lakewood's boundaries, the Lakewood municipal court is without jurisdiction over traffic offenses committed there.
Judgment affirmed.
JUDGE ENOCH and JUDGE SMITH concur.