Sinbeck v. State

Alabama Court of Appeals

Sinbeck v. State

179 So. 645, 28 Ala. App. 118, 1938 Ala. App. LEXIS 72

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 1, 1938

Docket8 Div. 592.

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 179 So. 645 (Sinbeck 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

Sinbeck v. State, 179 So. 645, 28 Ala. App. 118, 1938 Ala. App. LEXIS 72 (Ala. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

RICE, Judge.

It is a fact that appellant was found in the admitted possession of a number of bottles of beer, all of which bore the state stamp showing the Alabama alcoholic beverage tax had been paid on same, in Lauder-dale, which is one of the "dry” counties of the State as defined by section 51 of the “Alabama Beverage Control Act,” Gen.Acts Ala.Ex.Sess. 1936-37, pp. 40, 81; and that this possession was subsequent to the date of passage of the said act.

It is a further fact that this beer was found stored in a room which the jury were authorized under the evidence to find was “not used exclusively for a dwelling”— thus, according to the provisions .of Code 1928, § 4685, not repealed, that we can see, by the aforeherein cited Alabama Beverage Control Act — constituting “prima facie evidence” that same was “kept for sale,” or “with intent to sell the same.”

The Attorney General asks that we affirm, in some way, the judgment of conviction because of this latter fact. But we prefer to affirm it, and do, upon the authority of our decision and opinion in the case of Welder Williams v. State, 179 So. 915. 1

1

Ante, p. 72.

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