Whaley v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Whaley v. State

87 Ala. 83

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedDecember 15, 1888

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 87 Ala. 83 (Whaley 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

Whaley v. State, 87 Ala. 83 (Ala. 1888).

Pincite

Opinion

SOMERVILE, J.

The rulings of the Circuit Court in this case must be pronounced correct, on the authority of the following cases: Christian v. State, 40 Ala. 376; Pearce v. State, Ib. 720; Brown v. State, 31 Ala. 353; Patterson v. State, 36 Ala. 297; Powell v. State, 63 Ala. 177; Easterling v. State, 30 Ala. 46; Clark’s Man. Cr. Law, §§ 1609-1610. Under the authority of these decisions, if the liquor sold by the defendant was drunk within five or six steps of his store, and in full view of the premises, it was drunk “about his premises” within the meaning of the statute. Code, 1886, § 4036. It would avail nothing, that the liquor was drunk by the purchaser in the public road, over which [85]*85the defendant had no legal control, or that the defendant failed to notice the fact and time of its being drunk

This rule is a severe one in its consequences, and its reasonableness, in my judgment, may well be questioned; but the statute was long ago repeatedly so construed, and has been several times since re-adopted by the General Assembly, without change of phraseology; and on this ground, I adhere to this construction.

Affirmed.

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

SOMERVILE, J.

The rulings of the Circuit Court in this case must be pronounced correct, on the authority of the following cases: Christian v. State, 40 Ala. 376; Pearce v. State, Ib. 720; Brown v. State, 31 Ala. 353; Patterson v. State, 36 Ala. 297; Powell v. State, 63 Ala. 177; Easterling v. State, 30 Ala. 46; Clark’s Man. Cr. Law, §§ 1609-1610. Under the authority of these decisions, if the liquor sold by the defendant was drunk within five or six steps of his store, and in full view of the premises, it was drunk “about his premises” within the meaning of the statute. Code, 1886, § 4036. It would avail nothing, that the liquor was drunk by the purchaser in the public road, over which [85]*85the defendant had no legal control, or that the defendant failed to notice the fact and time of its being drunk

This rule is a severe one in its consequences, and its reasonableness, in my judgment, may well be questioned; but the statute was long ago repeatedly so construed, and has been several times since re-adopted by the General Assembly, without change of phraseology; and on this ground, I adhere to this construction.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

87 Ala. 83, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whaley-v-state-ala-1888.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack