Maples v. State

Decision Date22 May 1919
Docket Number6 Div. 921
Citation82 So. 183,203 Ala. 153
PartiesMAPLES et al. v. STATE.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Appeal from Circuit Court, Cullman County; Robert C. Brickell Judge.

Proceedings by the State against Arch Maples and wife in which C.H Beiker filed a petition setting up a claim to the automobile in question. From decree rendered, respondents and petitioner appeal. Affirmed.

Bill by the state of Alabama, filed by the deputy solicitor of Cullman county, against Arch Maples and Annie Maples, his wife, seeking to have declared forfeited to the state, and condemned for sale, one four-cylinder Buick touring automobile, under the provisions of the act approved January 25, 1919, entitled "An act to further suppress the evils of intemperance," etc. The bill, in substance, shows that on February 20, 1919, the automobile was seized in Cullman county by the sheriff of said county, while the same was in the actual possession of respondents--the property of one or both of them--and that when so seized it was being used for the transportation of prohibited liquors or beverages from one point to another within the state contrary to law.

The respondents demurred to the bill upon the ground that section 13 of said act of January 25, 1919, violates several provisions of the Constitution of Alabama, which demurrer was overruled. The defendants answered, neither admitting nor denying the allegations of the bill as to the seizure of the automobile, and that it was being used for the transportation of liquor, but setting up that they had purchased the car from one Beiker, who took a mortgage thereon for $500 to secure the balance of the purchase price.

C.H Beiker filed his petition under section 13 of the act approved January 25, 1919, setting up as his claim to the automobile mortgage executed by defendants for $500, by which title was retained in said Beiker, and that said $500 is still due and unpaid; and that under the provisions of said mortgage, the automobile having been seized under legal process, the note secured is now due, and that he has a superior right to the state of Alabama to said property. The prayer of the petition is that he (Beiker) be awarded the automobile, or, if the same is sold, that the register be ordered to pay petitioner the amount due on his mortgage out of the purchase price. The answer and petition were filed March 4, 1919.

The evidence for the state tended to show that the respondents Arch Maples and his wife, Annie Maples, were in the car in the city of Cullman on February 20, 1919, and that the car contained something more than five gallons of whisky. Respondent Arch Maples claimed the car belonged to his wife, he having bought it for her from one Beiker, the petitioner in the case. It is further stated that the whisky was being transported for a compensation, the said Maples to get $20 for making the delivery from one point to another within the state; that neither said Maples nor his wife made any mention of a mortgage having been executed; and, further, that Annie Maples stated that her husband, Arch Maples, "got the car from a fellow at Sheffield that owed him, and took the car in on part pay." There is evidence tending to show that while the whisky was being transported Arch Maples and his wife mentioned among themselves the sheriff detecting the same. It is also shown the whisky was in pasteboard cartons, and was between the front and back seats with some clothes over it.

Petitioner Beiker insisted that he sold the car to Annie Maples, taking a mortgage to secure the balance of the purchase price, she paying only $500, the mortgage being for $50, and that the same was signed by her and her husband, but was not recorded until after the car was seized. The mortgage bears date January 27, 1919, and was offered in evidence. One Schweninger testified that he witnessed the same at his home. Schweninger is the father of Annie Maples, and the father-in-law of Beiker. Annie Maples did not testify in the cause.

Upon final hearing, the trial court dismissed the petition of Beiker, and granted the relief prayed in the bill, as authorized by the above-cited act. From the decree rendered, the respondents and petitioner prosecute this appeal, and separately assign errors.

William E. James, of Cullman, for appellants.

J.Q. Smith, Atty. Gen., and Horace C. Wilkinson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.


By this proceeding the state seeks to have forfeited and condemned for sale a certain automobile which was seized by the sheriff of Cullman county while in possession of the owner, or owners, thereof, and being used in the transportation of prohibited liquors.

It is not questioned that the proceedings in this cause were had in strict compliance with the provisions of section 13 of the act of January 25, 1919, entitled "An act to further suppress the evils of intemperance; to restrict the receipt,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
21 cases
  • State v. McDaniel
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • January 2, 1925
    ... ... The ... sense of smell is sufficient to warrant an officer to enter ... and search the premises without a warrant, [115 Or. 226] and ... seize the utensils employed in such manufacture. United ... States v. Borkowski (D. C.) 268 F. 308, 412; Maples ... v. State, 203 Ala. 153, 82 So. 183 ... As to ... the admissibility of evidence unlawfully obtained, it seems ... that this court has ruled that such evidence is admissible ... The defendant states, in his well-prepared brief, that this ... appeal ... ...
  • Pickett v. Matthews, 2 Div. 149.
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • November 23, 1939
    ... ... If there exists any ... such prohibition it must be found elsewhere in the ... Constitution ... Sections ... 1, 6, 22, State Constitution; Amendment 14, Federal ... Constitution, U.S.C.A.: ... These ... taken together guarantee the equal protection of the laws, ... Property itself is sometimes forfeited to the State ... when the legislature finds it necessary to the police ... protection of the people. Maples v. State, 203 Ala ... 153, 82 So. 183 ... It is ... said to be well settled that the abolition of old rights ... recognized by the ... ...
  • Edwards v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • May 7, 1925
    ...435, 86 So. 21; Cherry-Ellington Auto Co. v. State, 210 Ala. 469, 98 So. 389; State v. Hughes, 203 Ala. 90, 82 So. 104; Maples v. State, 203 Ala. 153, 82 So. 183; Glover v. State, 205 Ala. 446, 88 So. 437; v. State, 205 Ala. 286, 87 So. 856; Bowling v. State, 204 Ala. 405, 85 So. 435; Echl ......
  • State v. Pluth
    • United States
    • Minnesota Supreme Court
    • November 16, 1923
    ... ... statute gives authority to seize but not to search, and an ... officer acting under it is authorized to seize only what he ... may discover without the unreasonable search prohibited by ... the Constitution. State v. McCann, 59 Me. 383; ... State v. Bradley, 96 Me. 121, 51 A. 816; Maples ... v. State, 203 Ala. 153, 82 So. 183; State v ... O'Neill, 58 Vt. 140, 2 A. 586, 56 Am. St. 557; ... State v. One Hudson Cabriolet Automobile, 116 Misc ... 399, 190 N.Y.S. 481; and see State v. Quinn, 111 ... S.C. 174, 97 S.E. 62, 3 A.L.R. 1500 ...           A ... search ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT