Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

241 Miss. 838

Brown v. State

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided October 16, 1961

Mississippi Supreme Court · decided 1961-10-16

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently June 2007

2 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“an order of the Board of Supervisors of Prentiss County, Mississippi . . . against the peace and dignity of the State of Mississippi”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 972 So. 2d 723 - Loveless v. City of Booneville

“allege that the possession was in violation of Chapter 279, Laws of 1958. . . .”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 972 So. 2d 723 - Loveless v. City of Booneville

Relies on Kelly v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1961-10-16

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Jones, J.

¶1Appellant was convicted and sentenced on an affidavit reading as follows:

“STATE OE MISSISSIPPI
“WINSTON COUNTY
“Before me, W. C. Wood a Justice of the Peace of the County aforesaid, Ralph Rhodes makes oath that on or about the 23rd day of July 1960 in the First Justice district, Winston County and said State, Willie Brown did wilfully and unlawfully have 1% gals of Homebrewed Beer in his possession and under his control, the transportation, storage, sale, distribution, receipts, and/ or manufacture of beer having been heretofore prohibited by order of Board of Supervisors of Winston County, pursuant to a lawful election, such order appearing of record in Board of Supervisors Minute Book 17, page 194 thereof, against the peace and dignity of the State of Mississippi.
Ralph Rhodes, Affiant
“Sworn to and subscribed before me this 25th day of July, 1960.
W. C. Wood, Justice of the Peace
District One”

¶2It will be noted that this affidavit is not as strong as the affidavit in Kelly v. State, 237 Miss. 112, 113 So. 2d 540. In the Kelly case, the affidavit was held insufficient.

¶3Chapter 279, Laws of 1958, in the instances there stated, declares unlawful possession of “beer” or “wine” without further definition. The affidavit charged the defendant with possession of “Homebrewed Beer.” While it is not necessary to say whether this term, as *841so used, was fatal, it would have been much better had it been followed by some descriptive term such as “beer, a malt beverage.”

¶4 The real fatality, however, results from the failure to allege that the possession was in violation of Chapter 279, Laws of 1958, Kelly v. State, supra.

¶5The affidavit could have provided that the possession was “in violation of Chapter 279, Laws of 1958, inasmuch as Winston County, Mississippi, elected, since February 26, 1934, to prohibit the transportation, storage, sale, distribution, receipt and/or manufacture of wine or beer of an alcoholic content of not more than four percent by weight, as shown by Minute Book________, Page -------, of the minutes of the Board of Supervisors of said County and State, contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the State of Mississippi.”

¶6The affidavit is insufficient to support the conviction but since it is amendable, the case is remanded.

¶7Reversed and remanded.

Lee, P.J., and Gillespie, McElroy, and Rodgers, JJ., concur.
/241/miss/838 · .json · Public domain