Martin v State | Study Guide - Edubirdie

University:
Eastern Kentucky University
Course:
LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies
Academic year:

2021
Views:

480

Pages:

1
Author:

Carissa Thomas

Martin v State (dragged to highway by cops, Actus Reus needs to be Voluntary) Alabama Court of Appeals, 1944 31 Ala.App 332, 17 So.2d 427. Facts: - Parties: o Martin: Defendant, Appellant- accused of being drunk on a public highway o State: Prosecution, Appellee- representative for the state of Alabama - Procedural History: o The appellant was convicted of being drunk on a public highway in a lower court, he is appealing the decision. - Basis for dispute: o The appellant is disputing the decision on the fact that he did not break the law because he was arrested at his home, and brought to the public highway where he started acting belligerent and intoxicated. Appellant claims that since he was arrested in his home and brought to the public highway by the cops, he should not be convicted of this crime Issue: - Whether or not the Appellant should be convicted over a public drunkenness rule that states, “anyone who, while intoxicated or drunk, appears in any public place where one or more persons are present”. Summary of Arguments: - Appellant claims that since he was arrested in his house and brought to the public highway where he committed the acts that the rule bans, however, since he was brought there he should not be convicted - Appellee claims that no matter how he got there, he still was drunk and disorderly in public and should be convicted due to the stated rule. Holding: - The court reversed the lower court’s conviction Reasoning: - The reason why the court reversed the conviction was because they believed the rule for drunkenness in public presupposed that the act was voluntary. In a criminal law case, the Actus Reus needs to be committed voluntarily. In this specific case, since the Appellant was arrested and brought to the highway involuntarily, he committed no crime.

Related Documents

Martin v State

Martin v State - Page 1

of 1

Recommended Documents

Euclid v.Ambler Realty Co.

Euclid v.Ambler Realty Co.

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

In Re Estate of Evans

In Re Estate of Evans

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

Johnson v. M’Intosh

Johnson v. M’Intosh

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

The Amistad

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

Wetherbee v. Green

Wetherbee v. Green

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

Delfino v.Vealencis

Delfino v.Vealencis

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

Hannan v. Dusch

Hannan v. Dusch

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

Kremen v. Cohen Network Solution, Inc.

Kremen v. Cohen Network Solution, Inc.

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

Wilson v. Wilson

Wilson v. Wilson

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

Cahill v. Morrow

Cahill v. Morrow

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

Chapter 14 Report Writing for High-Tech Investigations

Chapter 14 Report Writing for High-Tech Investigations

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Answer Key

Eyerman v. Mercantile Trust Co.

Eyerman v. Mercantile Trust Co.

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

New Documents from this Course

4. Explain the Essentialia of a Contract of Insurance

4. Explain the Essentialia of a Contract of Insurance

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

1. Deﬁne Insurance and Explain How a Contract of Insurance is Concluded

1. Deﬁne Insurance and Explain How a Contract of Insurance is Concluded

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

6. Explain the Consequences of Submitting a Fraudulent Claim to the Insurer

6. Explain the Consequences of Submitting a Fraudulent Claim to the Insurer

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

Singleton v Wulff

Singleton v Wulff

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

United States v. Richardson

United States v. Richardson

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

Ashcroft v. Iqbal

Ashcroft v. Iqbal

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, Inc

Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, Inc

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

White v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc

White v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

Miranda v. Arizona

Miranda v. Arizona

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide

A Person Treating the U.S. Flag Contemptuously is

A Person Treating the U.S. Flag Contemptuously is

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Answer Key

Representations

Representations

Eastern Kentucky University LGS 300 | Introduction to Legal Studies

Study Guide