Mote v. State
Alabama Court of Appeals
Appeal from Circuit Court, Calhoun County; Hugh D. Merrill, Judge. Charlie Mote was convicted of manufacturing prohibited liquor, and he appeals. The evidence did not disclose a making, and an attempt to make is not a violation under the law. 70 South. 949;' 82 South. 560; 115 Ala. 121, 22 South. 275. The cases 'relied on by the appellant have been expressly overruled.
1Opinion of the CourtBricken, P. J.
The defendant was joint- , ly indicted with two others, not on trial, for the offense of violating the act approved January 25, 1919, “to'further suppress the evils of intemperance,” known as the Weakley Bone Dry Law. Acts 1919, p. 6.
While the evidence failed to establish the fact that the defendant actually did distill, make, or manufacture any alcoholic, spirituous, or malted or mixed liquors or beverages of which a part was alcohol, the testimony is without dispute that he was caught in the act of attempting to do so, as was shown by the testimony of one of the witnesses, who said:
“We…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hutto v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1910
- Mixon v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1916
- Corona Coal Co. v. HendonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1922
- Corkran v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1919
3Cited by4 opinions
- Reed v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1978
- McDowell v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1924
- Plunkett v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1922
- Mote v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1920