(Download) "State v. Ruona" by Supreme Court of Montana # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: State v. Ruona
- Author : Supreme Court of Montana
- Release Date : January 23, 1958
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 58 KB
Description
CRIMINAL LAW ? DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED ? APPEAL AND ERROR ? BILL OF EXCEPTIONS ? STATUTES ? AUTOMOBILES. 1. Criminal Law ? Instruction held proper. An instruction applying the term as defined in another instruction to the facts involved is proper procedure. 2. Statutes ? Interpretation. The words of a statute are to be interpreted in their ordinary everyday sense unless a contrary interpretation is indicated in the statute. 3. Automobiles ? Meaning of words. Under the statute making it unlawful for any person who is under the influence of intoxicating liquor to drive or to be in actual physical control of any vehicle, if a person has existing or present bodily restraint, directing influence, domination or regulation of an automobile while under the influence of intoxicants he violates the statute, the words "actual," "physical," and "control" being used in their ordinary meanings. 4. Automobiles ? Movement of vehicle unnecessary. Under the statute making it unlawful for any person who is under the influence of intoxicants to drive or to be in actual, physical control of any vehicle, movement of the vehicle is unnecessary to establish an offense under the statute, so that one could have "actual physical control" while merely parking or standing still so long as one was keeping the car in restraint or in a position to regulate its movements. 5. Criminal Law ? Statute not invalid. The statute making it unlawful for any person who is under influence of intoxicants to drive or to be in the actual physical control of any vehicle is not invalid for vagueness or uncertainty. 6. Criminal Law ? Record failed to establish contention. Record on appeal failed to establish the contention of the defendant that the county attorney in the absence of the court reporter made statements about the failure of defendant to consent to certain scientific tests. - Page 244