Case ID: ala_209/html/0699-11.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "THOMAS, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

(95 South. 921)
    CREWS v. STATE ex rel. PATTERSON, Sol.
    (4 Div. 945.)
    (Supreme Court of Alabama.
    Feb. 8, 1923.)
    Appeal ’from Circuit Court, Barbour County; J. S. Williams, Judge. Petition of the State of Alabama, on the relation of T. M. Patterson, as Solicitor of the Third Judicial Circuit, to condemn a house and lot, the property of Joe Crews, Helen Crews, Jim James, and Charity James. Erom the decree, Helen Crews appeals. Affirmed. It is shown by the petition that the premises in question were occupied by Joe Crews, Helen Crews, Jim James and Charity James, and that said parties did operate or permit to be .operated in said house a distillery or plant for making liquors prohibited by law. The prayer is that the premises be forfeited to the state of Alabama. After hearing, the court rendered a decree adjudging the forfeiture of the interest of Jim James and Helen Crews in the property in question and condemning the same for sale. Helen Crews alone appeals.
    McDowell & McDowell, of Euijaula, for appellant.
    Counsel argue that the evidence was not sufficient to support the decree, as it affects the interest of appellant.
    T. M. Patterson, Sol., of Clayton, for appellee.
    No brief reached the Reporter.
   THOMAS, J.

The condemnation, in equity, was sought of an undivided interest in lands held by joint owners, under section 12, p. 12, Acts 1919.

The law as to leased premises was the subject of discussion in State ex rel. Attorney General v. Jebeles, 206 Ala. 161, 89 South. 547, and the burden of proof in such matter and the necessity of specific description of the premises sought to be forfeited were dealt with in Johnson v. State, 205 Ala. 294, 87 South. 815.

It is sufficient to say of the evidence that the same has been read and carefully considered, and we are of the opinion that the state has discharged the burden imposed by the law.

The decree of the circuit court, in equity, is affirmed. Affirmed.

ANDERSON, -C. J., and McCLELLAN and SOMERVILLE, Jj., concur.