Abernathy v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Abernathy v. State

74 So. 725, 15 Ala. App. 595, 1917 Ala. App. LEXIS 50

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 23, 1917

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 74 So. 725 (Abernathy v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Alabama Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Abernathy v. State, 74 So. 725, 15 Ala. App. 595, 1917 Ala. App. LEXIS 50 (Ala. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

BROWN, P. J.

The defendant was tried before the court without a jury on an indictment charging that the defendant “was engaged in the business of selling beverages and kept or stored on the premises where said beverage business was conducted prohibited liquors or beverages, the sale, offering for sale, or other disposition of which was prohibited by law.” This indictment is in the language of the statute, and charges the offense denounced by section 16 of the act approved January 23, 1915 (Acts 1915, p. 13).

The evidence shows that the defendant was engaged in selling Coca-Cola and other beverages at his place of business in Sheffield, Ala.; that such beverages were kept in an ice box. In the *596 same building and in a compartment thereof separated from the soft drink stand by a curtain, the officers found a half gallon jug containing about one quart of whisky, and the defendant testified that he kept this liquor there for his own personal use, and that it had been there for three or four days. The purpose of this statute is to prevent an evasion of the laws prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquors, and its enactment was a legitimate exercise of the police powers of the state.

There was evidence to support the finding of the trial court, and the judgment will be affirmed. — Mulligan v. State, infra, 204, 72 South. 761; Stout v. State, infra, 205, 72 South. 762.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

BROWN, P. J.

The defendant was tried before the court without a jury on an indictment charging that the defendant “was engaged in the business of selling beverages and kept or stored on the premises where said beverage business was conducted prohibited liquors or beverages, the sale, offering for sale, or other disposition of which was prohibited by law.” This indictment is in the language of the statute, and charges the offense denounced by section 16 of the act approved January 23, 1915 (Acts 1915, p. 13).

The evidence shows that the defendant was engaged in selling Coca-Cola and other beverages at his place of business in Sheffield, Ala.; that such beverages were kept in an ice box. In the *596 same building and in a compartment thereof separated from the soft drink stand by a curtain, the officers found a half gallon jug containing about one quart of whisky, and the defendant testified that he kept this liquor there for his own personal use, and that it had been there for three or four days. The purpose of this statute is to prevent an evasion of the laws prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquors, and its enactment was a legitimate exercise of the police powers of the state.

There was evidence to support the finding of the trial court, and the judgment will be affirmed. — Mulligan v. State, infra, 204, 72 South. 761; Stout v. State, infra, 205, 72 South. 762.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

74 So. 725, 15 Ala. App. 595, 1917 Ala. App. LEXIS 50, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/abernathy-v-state-alactapp-1917.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack