Summary of Martin v. State, Alabama Court of Appeals (1944)
Defendant: Martin; the defendant was charged and convicted for being drunk in public. The defendant was originally in his home and two officers took the defendant out on the highway where the defendant used loud and profane language, which brought the charges against the defendant.
Issue: Was the defendant guilty of violating the statue?
Legal Reasoning: The court ruled that even though the statue did not explicitly state this is words, but voluntariness was presupposed in the statue. The court ruled that the defendant can’t be convicted under the statue because he was forced to get out of his house by the police officers so his presence on the public highway was involuntary. The conviction was reversed.