Jimmerson v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Jimmerson v. State

97 So. 686, 19 Ala. App. 305

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 6, 1923

Docket4 Div. 664.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 97 So. 686 (Jimmerson 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

Jimmerson v. State, 97 So. 686, 19 Ala. App. 305 (Ala. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

SAMFORD, J.

The evidence for the state discloses that the crime was committed, if at all, during February or the first of March, 1919, and it is contended by defendant' that the law creating the offense of which defendant is charged did not become effective until March 27, 1919, sixty days after its approval by the Governor, and that the effort of the Legislature to make the law approved'January 25, 1919 (Act's 1919, p. 6), in section 21 (page 17), operative from its adoption was abortive. Section 21 of the act contains this clause:

“This act shall take effect from and after its passage and final enactment into law, the public welfare requiring it.’’

To hold with defendant’s contention would be to say that the above-quoted clause of the act was meaningless. But' for section 7805 of the Code of 1907, which conditionally suspends the operation and enforcement of penal statutes, all laws enacted by the Legislature would become effective upon their final adoption, which includes action by both houses of the Legislature and the approval of the Governor or his failure to act within the time prescribed by the Legislature. The act here in question specifically provides that the law shall take effect from final enactment into law, which can mean nothing else, other than immediately upon its complete enactment. The general charge as requested by defendant was properly refused.

We find no error in the record, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

SAMFORD, J.

The evidence for the state discloses that the crime was committed, if at all, during February or the first of March, 1919, and it is contended by defendant' that the law creating the offense of which defendant is charged did not become effective until March 27, 1919, sixty days after its approval by the Governor, and that the effort of the Legislature to make the law approved'January 25, 1919 (Act's 1919, p. 6), in section 21 (page 17), operative from its adoption was abortive. Section 21 of the act contains this clause:

“This act shall take effect from and after its passage and final enactment into law, the public welfare requiring it.’’

To hold with defendant’s contention would be to say that the above-quoted clause of the act was meaningless. But' for section 7805 of the Code of 1907, which conditionally suspends the operation and enforcement of penal statutes, all laws enacted by the Legislature would become effective upon their final adoption, which includes action by both houses of the Legislature and the approval of the Governor or his failure to act within the time prescribed by the Legislature. The act here in question specifically provides that the law shall take effect from final enactment into law, which can mean nothing else, other than immediately upon its complete enactment. The general charge as requested by defendant was properly refused.

We find no error in the record, and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

97 So. 686, 19 Ala. App. 305, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jimmerson-v-state-alactapp-1923.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack