Case Name: STATE v. MAROUN
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1914-11-04
Citations: 136 La. 54
Docket Number: No. 20769
Parties: STATE v. MAROUN.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Reports
Volume: 136
Pages: 53–55

Head Matter:
(66 South. 395)
No. 20769.
STATE v. MAROUN.
(Nov. 4, 1914.)
(Syllabus by Editorial Staff.)
Criminal Law &wkey;>322, 446 — Presumptions — Official Action — Documentary Evidence.
In a prosecution for selling liquors without a license, the recital in an ordinance of a police jury establishing prohibition is sufficient proof, in the absence of contrary evidence, of an election having been held; since a presumption of correctness attaches to official acts, and since the recital was in the nature of a finding of fact made by a high, public functionary in the regular course of the administration of the local government after investigation.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Criminal Law, Cent. Dig. §§ 728, 1032; Dec. Dig. <§=> 322, 446.]
Appeal from First Judicial District Court, Parish of Caddo; John R. Land, Judge.
N. Maroun was convicted of selling liquors without a license, and he appeals.
Affirmed.
E. P. Mills, of Shreveport, for appellant. R. G. Pleasant, Atty. Gen., W. A. Mabry, Dist. Atty.. of Shreveport (G. A. Gondran, of New Orleans, of. counsel), for the State.

Opinion:
PROVOSTY, J.
On a trial for selling liquors without a license, an ordinance of the police jury establishing prohibition, which recites that an election was held for voting whether the sale of liquors should be allowed or prohibited, is sufficient proof, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, of such an election having been held. The reason is that, as a presumption of correctness attaches to official acts (16 Cye. 1076), and as said ordinance could not have been validly adopted without an election having been held, its adoption is at least prima facie proof of the election having been held. Whether it is not juris et de jure proof until set aside in a direct suit — quaere? See State ex rel. Police Jury v. Judge, 43 La. Ann. 125, 9 South. 348. Moreover, the said recital of the election having been held is something more than the mere unsworn statement of the individuals composing the police jury. The police jury was the regularly constituted authority for holding the said election and ascertaining and reporting on its result. Said recital is therefore in the nature of a finding of fact made by a high public functionary, in the regular course of the administration of the local government, after investigation. See Wigmore on Ev. pars. 1633, 1635, 1670; Evanston v. Gunn, 99 U. S. 660, 25 L. Ed. 306.
Judgment affirmed.