State Ex Rel. Greeson v. Roberts

• Decision Date: 02 November 1936
• Citation: 126 Fla. 114,170 So. 457
• Parties: STATE ex rel. GREESON v. ROBERTS, Chief of Police.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

170 So. 457

126 Fla. 114

STATE ex rel. GREESON v. ROBERTS, Chief of Police.

Florida Supreme Court

November 2, 1936

En Banc.

Original habeas corpus proceeding by the State, on the relation of Kelly Greeson, against Abel J. Roberts, as Chief of Police of the City of Jacksonville.

Petitioner discharged.

COUNSEL Nathan J. Roberts, of Jacksonville, for petitioner.

Austin Miller and Gov. Hutchinson, both of Jacksonville, for respondent.

H. M Wise, of Jacksonville, and B. K. Roberts and William K Whitfield, both of Tallahassee, amici curiae.

OPINION

TERRELL Justice.

Petitioner was taken in custody by the city of Jacksonville for refusing to pay a license tax of $100 for operating a coinoperated device as prescribed by section 2 of Ordinance No. X-90 effective October 14, 1936. He seeks relief by habeas corpus.

The question we are called on to resolve is whether chapter 17257, Acts 1935, is the exclusive law of this state on the subject of licensing slot machines and coin-operated devices or may the city of Jacksonville impose a license tax on them independent of the state law on the subject.

The respondent contends that, under the provisions of section 1, chapter 5065, Acts 1901, it has the power to tax slot machines independent of chapter 17257, Acts 1935, and relies on Canova v. Williams, 41 Fla. 509, 27 So. 30, and like decisions, to support this contention.

We have read Canova v. Williams and other decisions relied on. We have also read section 2 of Ordinance No. X-90 of the city of Jacksonville imposing a license tax on slot machines, and we have read with interest the review of the general revenue laws and the decisions of this court construing them, submitted in support of respondent's contention, but in our view chapter 17257, Acts 1935, is now the sole and exclusive law on the subject.

Chapter 17257, Acts 1935, is the latest expression of the Legislature on the subject of licensing slot machines and coinoperated devices, it covers the whole subject matter fully, it defines a different policy from that heretofore in force, it sets out in terms the amounts that may be imposed as license taxes by the state, county, and municipality, and its provisions are such as to expressly repeal every other law on the subject. State ex rel. Bradford v. Stoutamire, 98 Fla. 486, 123 So. 834, and cases therein cited; State ex rel. Baker v. McCarthy, 122 Fla. 749, 166 So. 280.

The...