State v. O'ConnerState v. O'Conner
- Reporters:
- Before:
- Cole
Lead Opinion
Appellant was indicted for selling and delivering, in a store-house fitted up and kept by him, to a slаve, spirituous liquor, without the consent in writing of the owner, overseer or employer of thе slave.
The indictment alleges that he committed the act on the night of the eleventh of September, 1856.
He was found guilty and sentenced on the 5th of December, 1856, to imprisonment in the parish jail for one yeаr, a fine of five hundred dollars аnd costs of prosecutiоn.
It does not appear from the record under what рarticular Act he was indicted ; but on the 19th March, 1851, an Act was passed by the Legislature relative to offences of thе same character as that set forth in the indictment, and all laws on the same subject-mаtter were repealed without any saving clause as to prosecutions alreаdy commenced. Sess. Acts of 1857, p. 183.
This repeal operates as a pardon for the accused. State v. King, 12th An. p. 593.
No hill of exceptions, statement of facts, nor assignment of error has been mаdo in this court, nevertheless wе feel bound to notice this fаtal objection to the affirmance of the judgment.
It is our duty to notice, ex officio, the repeal of laws.
The motion to dismiss is, therefore, overruled.
It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged аnd decreed, that the verdiсt of the jury and the judgment of the court thereon be avoided and reversed, and that appellant be discharged.
Concurrence Opinion
concurring. There is a motion tо dismiss the appeal in this case because there is nеither a bill of exception nor an assignment of errors in thе record.
For my views on the motion to dismiss I refer to what we have said in the case of State v. Henderson, a slave, just decided.
On the merits, I concur in the opinion of Mr. Justice Oole.