F. S. SAMS, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
LEE MORRIS, AS SHERIFF OF VOLUSIA COUNTY, FLORIDA, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court upheld a statute establishing a closed hunting season for wild game birds and animals in Volusia County against constitutional challenges. The Court rejected the petitioner's arguments that the statute was invalid, finding it within the legislature's police power and constitutional.
The statute is valid and constitutional. Section 1, which defines the closed season on wild birds, is within the subject expressed in the statute's title, within legislative power, does not violate organic law, does not impair the right to acquire and protect property, and does not deny equal protection.
“No person shall hunt, trap, chase, molest, injure, kill or destroy, or attempt to hunt, trap, chase, molest, injure, kill or destroy, by any means whatsoever, or have or be in the possession of, any wild deer, turkey, quail, turtle dove, ducks or other wild birds, fowls Or animals of any kind or species, within the County of Yolusia, State of Florida”
The central operative language of the statute establishing the closed hunting season that was upheld by the Court
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceF. S. Sams was charged with hunting and molesting one quail with a shotgun on January 15, 1924, in violation of Chapter 9661, Acts of 1923, which esta…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Legislative Power cases and more on FLexlaw
Per Curiam.
In habeas corpus proceedings before the Circuit Judge the petitioner was remanded under a sentence by a justice of the peace to pay a fine of two dollars, and in default thereof to be confined in the county jail for two days upon a charge that on January 15, 1924, petitioner did with a shot gun hunt and molest one quail, a wild game bird, contrary to Chapter 9661, Acts of 1923. On Writ of Error it is contended that the Statute is invalid upon numerous specific grounds. The title, and sections 1 and 8 of the statute are as follows:
“AN ACT to Provide a Closed Season for the Hunting, Killing, Molesting or Otherwise Disturbing any Wild Game Bird, Fowl or Animal in Volusia County, Florida; to Provide a Penalty Therefor and to Provide a Rule of Evidence in the Prosecution of Violations of this Act. “Section 1. No person shall hunt, trap, chase, molest, injure, kill or destroy, or attempt to hunt, trap, chase, molest, injure, kill or destroy, by any means whatsoever, or have or be in the possession of, any wild deer, turkey, quail, turtle dove, ducks or other wild birds, fowls Or animals of any kind or species, within the County of Yolusia, State of Florida, (except as herein otherwise provided), from and after the passage of this Act and its becoming a law, to the 20th day of November, A. D. 1925; the said period of time stated being hereby declared a closed season on all wild birds and animals of said County.
“Sec. 8. Any person found guilty of the violation of any provision of this Act shall be deemed and held to be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished, as provided by law.”
Section 1 of the Act is within the subject expressed in the title and matter properly connected therewith; it defines the ‘ ‘ closed season ’ ’ on wild birds; it is within the legislative power and does not violate organic law. It does not impair the organic right to acquire, possess and protect property, and does not deny to any one equal rights or the equal protection of the laws. Sections 1 and 8 may be made effective by the proper officers of the county even if other sections are invalid, such invalidity, if it exists, not affecting the validity or efficacy of sections 1 and 8 for the purposes designed.
Affirmed.
Taylor, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Browne, West, and Terrell, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Calhoun Cnty., 126 Fla. 376 (Fla. 1936)…South. Rep. 469; State v. Brown, 19 Fla. 563; Boynton v. State, 103 Fla. 1113, 138 South. Rep. 639; South Fla. Trust Co. v. Miami Coliseum Corp., 101 Fla. 1351, 133 South. Rep. 334; Haile v. Gardner, 82 Fla. 355, 91 South. Rep. 376; Sams v. Morris, 88 Fla. 162, 101 South. Rep. 206; Gwynn v. Hardee, 92 Fla. 543, 110 South. Rep. 343; State v. Simpson, 122 Fla. 582, 166 South. Rep. 227; State v. Lee, 122 Fla. 629, 166 South. Rep. 249; State v. A. C. L. R. Co., 56 Fla. 617, 47 South. Rep. 969. It is contende…