Skip to main content

Butler v. State

Citations

  • 25 Fla. 347

Syllabus

<p>1. Two systems of law which are entirely repugnant to each other cannot be in force in the same locality at the same time.</p> <p>2. Whenever the local option Article of the Constitution prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquors, wines or beer is put in operation in uny county or any election district, it suspends, during the period of its operation therein, the provisions of all statutes authorizing or licensing the sale of intox eating liquors, either spirituous, vinous or matl, in such county or district.</p> <p>3. Where two counts of an indictment charge a violation of a system of law which authorizes the sale of certain liquors if a license has been obtained in a manner prescribed by it, and the other count charges the violation of a system which prohibits any sale of such liquors in a part of the territory covered by the allegations of the former counts, the two sets of counts are irreconcilably repugnant, and the indictment insufficient in law. It cannot be known upon which system the State intends to rely as being in force in the territory covered by the third count.</p> <p>4. Where the counts of an indictment are based, some on one system of law and the other on another system, which systems cannot be in operation at the same time in the same territory, and the verdict is “guilty as charged in the indictment,” and the sentence is of a character authorized in the case of a lawful conviction under either system, the verdict and sentence will be set aside. It cannot be known upon what law the verdict and sentence are founded.</p> <p>5. Neither the local option Article of the Constitution, nor the statute enforcing the same, prohibit the sale of liquors, wine or beer that is not intoxicating.</p> <p>6. An indictment for selling liquor, wine or beer in a county or election district in which the local option Article of the Constitution is in force, must allege that the liquor, wine or beer charged to have been sold was intoxicating, unless it names a specif

Judges: Raney

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

20 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.