Raynard v. State
| Citation | 96 So. 723,19 Ala.App. 281 |
| Decision Date | 26 June 1923 |
| Docket Number | 6 Div. 202. |
| Parties | RAYNARD v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; H. P. Heflin, Judge.
G. M Raynard, alias F. S. Wells, was convicted of violating the Blue Sky Law, and appeals. Affirmed.
Percy G. Gellert, of Birmingham, for appellant.
Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., and Lamarx Field, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
The defendant was charged with the violation of the act approved October 1, 1920. Said act is entitled "An act, to amend an act entitled, an act to prevent frauds and impositions upon the people of the state and to protect investors," etc. This legislative enactment is commonly called the "Blue Sky Law." Laws 1920, p. 60.
The indictment contained eight counts, each of which charged in the language of the statute that the defendant did sell, or offer for sale in this state by means of an advertisement circulars, or prospectus, or by other form of public offering, speculative securities, etc., without first having obtained a permit as is required by the statutes in such cases made and provided.
The indictment was sufficient, for in order to constitute a violation of the statute in question the selling or offering for sale of any speculative securities defined in section 2 of said act, such selling or offering for sale must be by means of an advertisement, circular, or prospectus, or by any other form of public offering, without having obtained a permit so to do from the Public Service Commission as the law requires. It is clear from the provisions of said act, supra, that unless the selling or offering for sale is accomplished by one or all of the means designated, that is by advertising said speculative securities, or by circulars or prospectus or some other form of public offering then said act does not apply, and if the speculative securities are sold or offered for sale without the employment of any of the inhibited means, supra, the act in question is not violated and no permit from the Public Service Commission is required or necessary. In other words, if the selling or offering for sale of a speculative security is done by private sale or by privately offering for sale, the Blue Sky Law of this state has no application to such private sales or private offer to sell, for the statute is directed only to the sale or offer to sell speculative securities" by means of any advertisement,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Manson v. State, 1 Div. 667
...October 1, 1920, the sufficiency of the indictment charging an offense in the language of the statute was considered. Raynard v. State, 19 Ala.App. 281, 96 So. 723 (1923). It was therein "The indictment contained eight counts, each of which charged in the language of the statute that the de......
-
State v. Skinner
... ... part and sustained by the Criminal Court of Appeals of that ... state in Hornaday v. State, 208 P. 228 ... "This ... statute has been in review before the appellate court from a ... judgment of conviction thereunder in the case of Raynard ... v. State, 19 Ala. App. 281, 96 So. 723, but the ... questions presented here were not raised therein ... "Definitions ... 1 and 3, being void and unconstitutional, would not ... necessarily render the entire act void, and we hold it does ... not in this instance, because the ... ...
-
Robertson v. Business Boosters' Country Club
... ... exclusively by personal solicitation or private negotiation, ... were not made in violation of the act. Raynard v. State ... (Ala.App.) 96 So. 723." ... On the ... second trial defendant presented new evidence, consisting of ... publications in the ... ...
- Hawes v. State