Legal Opinion
Laminack v. State
Alabama Court of Appeals
Decided January 31, 1922No. 7 Div. 774. [fn*]PublishedCited by 6 opinions
Appeal from Circuit Court, Cleburne County ; A. P. Agee, Judge. George and Chester Laminack were convicted of violating the prohibition law anrl they appeal. The indictment was void and subject to the demurrers imposed. Ante, p. 217, 90 South. 16; 88 South. 362; 17 Ala. App. 464, 86 Soutfi. 172; 16 Ala. App. 534, 79 South. 314; 159 Ala. 71, 48 South. 864, 133 Am. St. Rep. 20; 158 Ala. 44, 48 South. 505.
1Opinion of the CourtSamford, J.
The indictment was as follows:
“The grand jury of said county charge that before the finding of this indictment, George Laminack and Chester Laminack distilled, made, or manufactured alcoholic, spirituous, malted, or mixed liquors or beverages, a part of which was alcohol.
“Second. The grand jury of said county further charge that before the finding of this indictment George Baminack and Chester Baminaek manufactured, sold, gave away, or had in his possession a still, apparatus, appliance, or device or substitute therefore, to be used for the purpose of manufacturing prohibited liquors or…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Bibb v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1887
- Clark v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1921
- Howard v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1920
- Coker v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1922
- Adams v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1877
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Holt v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1939
- Holt v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1939
- Baker v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1922
- Webb v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1922
- Ex Parte LaminackSupreme Court of Alabama · 1922
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.