In Re Bond
Before: THE COURT. —
Synopsis
PETITION for writ of habeas corpus to the city marshal of the city of Upland, San Bernardino County.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
THE COURT.
Petitioner was found guilty of violating a prohibitory liquor ordinance of the city of Upland and sentenced to pay a fine of fifty dollars; with the alternative of imprisonment of one day for each dollar of fine. On application of his attorney to this court a writ was issued against the city marshal of Upland, in whose custody petitioner was detained, and the matter is before us for hearing upon the sufficiency of the petition.
The complaint and a stipulated statement of the evidence upon which the conviction was had are made part of the petition. The complaint charges that the defendant did . . . willfully and unlawfully sell, furnish, distribute, deliver and give away, and for a long time prior thereto had been willfully and unlawfully selling, furnishing, distributing and giving away, spirituous and malt intoxicating liquors, to wit, whisky and beer. The portion of the ordinance necessary to be considered here reads: “Section 1. Any person, firm, corporation, club, or association that within the city of Upland, -California, establishes, keeps, opens, maintains or carries on a place where spirituous, vinous or malt, or mixed liquors, or any alcoholic or any intoxicating drink or drinks, or so-called temperance beer, containing alcohol in any quantity whatever, are sold, kept for sale, offered for sale, furnished, distributed, divided, delivered, drunk or given away;
or,
that within said city, either as owner, employee, agent, servant, clerk, or otherwise, sells, keeps for sale, offers for sale, furnishes, distributes, divides, delivers, or gives away,- any spirituous, vinous, malt or mixed liquors, or any alcoholic or intoxicating drink or drinks, or so-called temperance beer containing alcohol in any quantity whatever, except as herein provided, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor.” The exception relates to sales for medical and mechanical purposes.
The petition shows that the defendant is -a member of a secret society organized in Upland and incorporated in this state under the name of the “Protective Brotherhood of the Alamo”; the purposes of the order, as set forth in the articles
[257]
•of incorporation, are: “To promote charities, moral and social ■ethics, fratemalism, righteous citizenship, the brotherhood of its members and benevolence to all mankind. To encourage useful and. profitable industries,' to provide amusements, athletic sports, libraries, reading-rooms, cafes, social halls and •club-rooms for its members. To provide for sick and disabled members and the families of deceased members. To organize", •charter, equip and institute subordinate lodges of the Protective Brotherhood of the Alamo, in this and other states. 'To
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)