Casey v. People, No. 18822
| Docket Nº | No. 18822 |
| Citation | 139 Colo. 89, 336 P.2d 308 |
| Case Date | March 09, 1959 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Colorado |
Page 308
v.
PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Defendant in Error.
Page 309
William R. Casey, pro se.
Duke W. Dunbar, Atty. Gen., Frank [139 Colo. 90] E. Hickey, Deputy Atty. Gen., John W. Patterson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.
SUTTON, Justice.
Casey was defendant in a justice of the peace court in a misdemeanor prosecution for failure to secure a trailer court license. The People there alleged that the operation of his trailer court was contrary to the rules and regulations of the Board of Health of the Tri-County District Health Department and contrary to the statutes of the State of Colorado. The jury verdict was that Casey was guilty as charged. Appeal was taken to the County Court where defendant was again found guilty. Motion for new trial was denied and Casey is here by writ of error.
He alleges several grounds for reversal, only one of which is necessary to determine the matter here. In substance this relates to whether C.R.S. '53, 66-2-7(4), has unlawfully delegated power to adopt rules and regulations to the various local boards of health, while at the same time providing by C.R.S. '53, 66-2-14 that the violation of any such rules and regulations shall be a misdemeanor subject to a fine of $1,000 or one year's imprisonment, or both penalties?
As to this ground the Attorney General, in his brief, has commendably admitted on behalf of the People that 'Thus it appears that the legislature has delegated to the executive department the power to define a crime in violation of Article III of the Colorado Constitution. People v. Lange (1910), 48 Colo. 428, 110 P. 68, Sapero v. State Board (1932), 90 Colo. 568, 11 P.2d 555.' With this conclusion we are in agreement and add that we appreciate the candor and fairness of the Attorney [139 Colo. 91] General in so readily acknowledging the sound basic principle involved.
Only the legislature may declare an act to be a crime. People v. Lange, supra. That precious power cannot be delegated to others not elected by or responsible to the People. As stated in 16 C.J.S. 580 Constitutional Law § 138:
'Executive officers, boards or commissions may not be authorized by the legislature to promulgate rules and regulations of a strictly and exclusively legislative character. The legislature may not vest executive officers or bodies with uncontrolled discretion in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Gallegos, No. 80SA252
...represents the popular will and is accountable to it. L. Tribe, American Constitutional Law, § 5-17 at 286 (1978). See Casey v. People, 139 Colo. 89, 336 P.2d 308 The defendant argues that the discretion accorded the prosecutor in deciding whether or not to charge an eligible offender under......
-
Boehl v. Sabre Jet Room, Inc., No. 17
...1552, 91 L.Ed. 2030; Kentucky Alcoholic Beverage Control Board v. Klein, 301 Ky. 757, 192 Page 592 S.W.2d 735; Casey v. People, Colo.1959, 336 P.2d 308; People v. Yonker, 351 Ill. 139, 184 N.E. 228; General Motors Corp. v. Blevins, D.C.Colo., 144 F.Supp. 381, 396; or, between 'substantive l......
-
Davis v. City and County of Denver, Nos. 18293
...Colo. 317, 87 P. 791, 8 L.R.A.,N.S., 131; Burcher v. People, 41 Colo. 495, 93 P. 14, 124 Am.St.Rep. 143; Casey v. People, 139 Colo. ----, 336 P.2d 308. Amazing to me is the citation of authorities in the majority opinion. A reading of this material supports my contention and does not give a......
-
State v. Watts, No. 54164
...This exclusive legislative function may not be delegated to any other body or agency without adequate guidelines. Casey v. People, 139 Colo. 89, 336 P.2d 308, 309; Greenwald v. State, 221 Md. 235, 155 A.2d 894, 897, appeal dismissed, 363 U.S. 719, 80 S.Ct. 1596, 4 L.Ed.2d 1521; Lapinski v. ......
-
People v. Gallegos, No. 80SA252
...represents the popular will and is accountable to it. L. Tribe, American Constitutional Law, § 5-17 at 286 (1978). See Casey v. People, 139 Colo. 89, 336 P.2d 308 The defendant argues that the discretion accorded the prosecutor in deciding whether or not to charge an eligible offender under......
-
Boehl v. Sabre Jet Room, Inc., No. 17
...1552, 91 L.Ed. 2030; Kentucky Alcoholic Beverage Control Board v. Klein, 301 Ky. 757, 192 Page 592 S.W.2d 735; Casey v. People, Colo.1959, 336 P.2d 308; People v. Yonker, 351 Ill. 139, 184 N.E. 228; General Motors Corp. v. Blevins, D.C.Colo., 144 F.Supp. 381, 396; or, between 'substantive l......
-
Davis v. City and County of Denver, Nos. 18293
...Colo. 317, 87 P. 791, 8 L.R.A.,N.S., 131; Burcher v. People, 41 Colo. 495, 93 P. 14, 124 Am.St.Rep. 143; Casey v. People, 139 Colo. ----, 336 P.2d 308. Amazing to me is the citation of authorities in the majority opinion. A reading of this material supports my contention and does not give a......
-
State v. Watts, No. 54164
...This exclusive legislative function may not be delegated to any other body or agency without adequate guidelines. Casey v. People, 139 Colo. 89, 336 P.2d 308, 309; Greenwald v. State, 221 Md. 235, 155 A.2d 894, 897, appeal dismissed, 363 U.S. 719, 80 S.Ct. 1596, 4 L.Ed.2d 1521; Lapinski v. ......