Legal Opinion

State v. Bromley

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided March 15, 1856PublishedCited by 3 opinions

This was a complaint preferred by a grand-juror of the town of North Stonington to a justice of the peace, for a violation of the twenty-ninth section of the statute of 1854, entitled “ An Act for the suppression of intemperance.”

Read the full summary

This was a complaint preferred by a grand-juror of the town of North Stonington to a justice of the peace, for a violation of the twenty-ninth section of the statute of 1854, entitled “ An Act for the suppression of intemperance.” That part of said section material to the present case, is as follows: “ If any person shall be found intoxicated, he shall, on conviction thereof, pay a fine of twenty dollars to the treasury of the town in which the offence is committed, together with the costs of prosecution, and stand committed until the judgment be complied with.” The complaint was in the…

1Opinion of the CourtEllsworth, J.

This is an information against the prisoner, under the 29th section of the act of 1854, for the suppression of intemperance. The offence is described in the act, as “being- found intoxicated,” and is the same offence as being found drunk, which has been a statute offence in this state, from a remote period.

By the seventeenth section of the act of 1854, it is provided “ if any person shall be found in a state of intoxica*9tiou, any sheriff, &c., without iuarrant, may take such person into custody and detain him until he shall be recovered from his intoxication, &c., when he may make full…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Critchett v. American InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1880
  2. State v. GagerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1859
  3. State v. AustinSupreme Court of Vermont · 1890

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API