From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Clonts v. State

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Mar 6, 1923
95 So. 562 (Ala. Crim. App. 1923)


7 Div. 900.

February 6, 1923. Rehearing Denied March 6, 1923.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Calhoun County; A.P. Agee, Judge.

John Clonts was convicted of possessing whisky, and he appeals. Affirmed.

Merrill Allen, of Anniston, for appellant.

The complaint as filed by the solicitor set up new and separate offenses, not included in the original affidavit, and the demurrers should have been sustained. 16 Ala. App. 138; 200 Ala. 700, 76 So. 998; 17 Ala. App. 403, 86 So. 164.

Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., for the State.

No brief reached the Reporter.

The appeal is on the record, there being no bill of exceptions, and presents but one question. The prosecution was begun in the county court by affidavit and warrant, which charged that defendant had in possession whisky in violation of law. On appeal to the circuit court the solicitor filed his information in which is charged that defendant did receive, accept delivery of, possess, or have in his possession prohibited liquors, etc. Demurrer was interposed to this information upon the ground of a departure, in that the affidavit had only charged possession, while the information charged other offenses. Demurrer was overruled, and this action of the court is here assigned as error. Our attention is called to the case of Echols v. State, 16 Ala. App. 138, 75 So. 814, wherein this court held that the addition of counts charging possession of more than a half gallon of liquor was a departure from a charge of selling, etc. And in Denham v. State, 17 Ala. App. 403, 86 So. 163, where we held that an affidavit, charging that defendant sold whisky, would not support an information charging other and distinct offenses against the prohibition law. These cases are not authorities in the case at bar. Receiving or accepting delivery of prohibited liquor would be impossible in the absence of possession. Therefore, receiving and accepting delivery of liquor, is, ex necessitate, embraced in a charge of possessing liquor.

A departure in pleading is where a previous ground in the pleading is abandoned and a new ground assumed. McAden v. Gibson, 5 Ala. 341. In the instant case there was no such abandonment, each alternate averment embracing a possession. The demurrer was properly overruled.

The judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

Clonts v. State

Court of Appeals of Alabama
Mar 6, 1923
95 So. 562 (Ala. Crim. App. 1923)
Case details for

Clonts v. State

Case Details

Full title:CLONTS v. STATE

Court:Court of Appeals of Alabama

Date published: Mar 6, 1923


95 So. 562 (Ala. Crim. App. 1923)
19 Ala. App. 130

Citing Cases

Smitherman v. State

A comparison of the affidavit with the provisions of the statute will suffice to illustrate our view that the…

Melech v. State

We are of opinion a different offense was not charged here. The possession of the shrimp was embraced in the…