Dunston v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Dunston v. State

124 Ala. 89

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedNovember 15, 1899

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 124 Ala. 89 (Dunston v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dunston v. State, 124 Ala. 89 (Ala. 1899).

Pincite

Opinion

SHARPE, J.

-Neither by the letter nor by the spirit of the statute prohibiting the carrying of weapons,concealed about the person is any exception created in-fayor of place. One of the objects of the law is the avoidance [90]*90of bad influences which the wearing of a concealed deadly weapon may exert upon the wearer himself, and which in that way, as well as by the weapon’s obscured convenience for use, may tend to the insecurity of other persons. — Owens v. State, 31 Ala. 387; Reid v. State, 1 Ala. 612.

The mental suggestions which proceed from constant contact with weapons specially adapted to, and usually worn for the purpose of inflicting bodily harm to persons, may come as well when the wearer is in his domicil as elsewhere. The only matter relied on to acquit the defendant is that he Avas in his home Avhen carrying the pistol concealed upon his person and that until the time of his arrest he was alone. This neither avoids the operation of the statute nor excuses its violation. — Harmon v. State, 69 Ala. 248; Owens v. State, supra. The judgment will be affirmed.

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

SHARPE, J.

-Neither by the letter nor by the spirit of the statute prohibiting the carrying of weapons,concealed about the person is any exception created in-fayor of place. One of the objects of the law is the avoidance [90]*90of bad influences which the wearing of a concealed deadly weapon may exert upon the wearer himself, and which in that way, as well as by the weapon’s obscured convenience for use, may tend to the insecurity of other persons. — Owens v. State, 31 Ala. 387; Reid v. State, 1 Ala. 612.

The mental suggestions which proceed from constant contact with weapons specially adapted to, and usually worn for the purpose of inflicting bodily harm to persons, may come as well when the wearer is in his domicil as elsewhere. The only matter relied on to acquit the defendant is that he Avas in his home Avhen carrying the pistol concealed upon his person and that until the time of his arrest he was alone. This neither avoids the operation of the statute nor excuses its violation. — Harmon v. State, 69 Ala. 248; Owens v. State, supra. The judgment will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

124 Ala. 89, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dunston-v-state-ala-1899.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack