White v. Commonwealth
| Decision Date | 20 April 1899 |
| Citation | 50 S.W. 678 |
| Parties | WHITE v. COMMONWEALTH. [1] |
| Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Appeal from circuit court, Whitley county.
"Not to be officially reported."
W. A White was convicted of the offense of selling liquor, and he appeals. Affirmed.
Crawford & Moore and John H. Wilson, for appellant.
J. N Sharp and W. S. Taylor, for the Commonwealth.
The appellant was indicted and convicted for selling spirituous liquors contrary to the provisions of an act of the general assembly to regulate the sale of spirituous, vinous, or malt liquors, or any intoxicating beverage, in the counties of Knox and Whitley, approved April 15, 1884, and adjudged to pay a fine of $100, and he appeals to this court.
The defendant demurred generally to the indictment, on the ground that it was not sufficiently specific in its description of the offense charged; and it is insisted that the special act under which the indictment was framed is unconstitutional and void for several reasons: First, because it is a violation of that provision of the constitution which declares that no law enacted by the general assembly shall relate to more than one subject, and that shall be expressed in the title; that the special prohibitory liquor act relating to Knox and Whitley counties has become inoperative, under section 1 of the schedule of the constitution, because more than six years have elapsed since the adoption of the constitution; because the act itself provides for cumulative punishment, which is in conflict with the general laws.
Every point relied on by counsel has been the subject of consideration by this court in cases similar to that at bar and has been decided adversely to the contention made here. This is a proceeding for the violation of a special prohibitory statute applicable alone to Knox and Whitley counties. The indictment in this case contains every necessary allegation. It charges the offense, and refers to the statute under which the proceeding is instituted by its title, and gives the day on which it became a law, as required by subsection 2, § 119, Civ. Code Prac. Thompson v. Com. (Ky.) 46 S.W. 492, discusses fully the effect of section 1 of the schedule of the constitution upon local acts of the character of that under which this prosecution was instituted, and holds that such laws in force at the date of the adoption of the constitution were not repealed by virtue of any of its provisions. It was held in the same case that the effect of the opinions in the Stamper Case, 42 S.W. 915 and in that case was that the law embodied in sections 2557 and 2558 of the Kentucky Statutes was in force in all localities in which prohibitory laws were in force before the adoption of the act of March 10, 1894, and that those sections would so remain in force until the people in such localities shall vote otherwise.
The question of increased punishment for second and third convictions for the same offense has been frequently considered by this court, and it has been uniformly held that the legislature may increase the punishment in such cases to prevent a repetition of the offense. See Taylor v. Com., 3 Ky. Law Rep. 783; Boggs v. Same (Ky.) 5 S. W. 307; Chenowith v. Same (Ky.) 12 S.W. 585; Combs v. Same (Ky.) 20 S.W. 268; Herndon v. Same (Ky.) 48 S.W. 989; 1 Bush, Cr. Law, §§ 959-965.
It is therefore unnecessary to consider further these questions nor can we agree with the contention of appellant that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Turner v. Commonwealth
... ... other hand, Turner testified that he was out in the country ... setting steel traps and met a colored fellow by the name of ... George Cole, who lived in the South Elkhorn neighborhood, and ... who sold him the chickens and sack for $7.50, or $1.25 ... apiece. He further claims that a white man was present and ... witnessed the transaction. Neither Cole nor the white man ... appeared as a witness, and no effort was made to procure ... their testimony ... Here, ... then, we have a case where McMeekin lost certain chickens ... Though he was candid enough to ... ...
-
Harp v. Com.
...law as contained in sections 2557, 2558, Ky. St. Stamper v. Com., 42 S.W. 915; Thompson v. Com., 45 S.W. 1039, 46 S.W. 492, 698; White v. Com., 50 S.W. 678. The general law simply for a fine of not less than $100 nor more than $200, and this fine may be recovered, under section 11 of the Cr......
-
Carroll v. Bosworth
... ... and, as such, became very familiar with the transactions ... between Bacon and the commonwealth. As a result of that ... investigation the Attorney General of Kentucky, N. B. Hays, ... thereafter determined to institute an action against Bacon ... 130, 32 S.W. 285, 17 Ky. Law Rep. 678; Smith v ... Commonwealth, 8 Bush, 112; Bierley v. T. P ... Co., 29 S.W. 874, 17 Ky. Law Rep. 36; White v ... Commonwealth, 50 S.W. 678, 20 Ky. Law Rep. 1944; ... Henderson Bridge Co. v. Alves, 122 Ky. 46, 90 S.W ... 995, 28 Ky. Law Rep. 996. In ... ...
-
Harp v. Commonwealth
...as contained in sections 2557, 2558, Ky. St. Stamper v. Com., 42 S. W. 915; Thompson v. Com., 45 S. W. 1039, 46 S. W. 492, 698; White v. Com., 50 S. W. 678. The general law provides simply for a fine of not less than $100, nor more than $200, and this fine may be recovered, under section 11......