State v. Carroll

• Decision Date: 30 January 1948
• Docket Number: No. 34585.,34585.
• Citation: 31 N.W.2d 44,225 Minn. 384
• Parties: STATE v. CARROLL.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

31 N.W.2d 44

225 Minn. 384

STATE v. CARROLL.

No. 34585.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

January 30, 1948.

Appeal from District Court, Otter Tail County; R. E. Barron, Judge.

Robert F. Carroll was convicted of operating an automobile while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, the district court affirmed the conviction and the defendant appeals.

Affirmed.

Henry Nycklemoe, of Fergus Falls, for appellant.

J. A. A. Burnquist, Atty. Gen., and Ralph A. Stone, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Chester G. Rosengren, County Atty., of Fergus Falls, for respondent.

FRANK T. GALLAGHER, Justice.

Appeal from a judgment of the district court affirming the judgment of the municipal court of Fergus Falls convicting defendant of operating an automobile while under the influence of intoxicating liquor.

At the time of the appeal to the district court, a stipulation was entered into between the parties and duly made a part of the record. We quote the pertinent parts of the stipulation: "That on the 3d day of August, 1947, in the Township of Elizabeth, the defendant, Robert F. Carroll, while under the influence of intoxicating liquor drove and operated an automobile either on or near a private roadway at a summer resort located in the said town, and which summer resort the public is invited to attend for the purpose of patronizing the same in the purchase of merchandise, non-intoxicating liquors, rental of boats and equipment, rental of cottages, and other services incidental to the operation of a summer resort."

The court found that on August 3, 1947, while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, defendant operated an automobile on or near a private roadway at a summer resort located in Otter Tail county, Minnesota. In its conclusions of law the court said in part:

"I. That defendant's operation of said automobile violated the provisions of Minn. St. 169.12 [M.S.A. § 169.12].

"II. That the judgment and sentence of the Municipal Court of Otter Tail County, Minnesota, herein be and it is in all things affirmed."

The only question for consideration here is whether defendant was guilty of a violation of M.S.A. § 169.12, which provides in part as follows: "It is unlawful and punishable as provided in this section for any person who is an habitual user of narcotic drugs or any person who is under the influence of intoxicating liquor or narcotic drugs to drive or operate any vehicle within this state."

The section quoted above must be read in conjunction with § 169.02, subd. 1 of which reads as follows:

"Obedience; effect. The provisions of this chapter relating to the operation of vehicles refer exclusively to the operation of vehicles upon highways, except:

"(1) Where a different place is specifically referred to in a given section;

"(2) The provisions of sections 169.09 to 169.13 shall apply upon highways and elsewhere throughout the state."

It is the claim of the state that a person is guilty of a violation of the statute if the vehicle is operated on a public highway or on a private road. Defendant contends that the application of the statute is limited to the operation of vehicles upon public highways.

Where there is no uncertainty or ambiguity in its language, a statute is to be enforced literally as it reads if its...