562.23

Conspiracy to violate Beverage Law; penalty.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

562.23 Conspiracy to violate Beverage Law; penalty.—If two or more persons shall conspire to do any act which is in violation of any of the provisions of the Beverage Law, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy, if the act so conspired to be done would be a misdemeanor under the provisions of the Beverage Law, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083, or, if the act so conspired to be done would be a felony under the provisions of the Beverage Law, shall be guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

History.—s. 6, ch. 19301, 1939; CGL 1940 Supp. 7648(26); s. 3, ch. 29964, 1955; s. 568, ch. 71-136; s. 2, ch. 72-230.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1958–1967 · leading case: State v. Altman

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Altman (1958) fla · cites it 2× “451 Florida Statutes, and adding a new Subsection (4) thereto, providing for penalties for possession of mash, wort, wash or moonshine liquor; amending Subsections (2) (3) and (4) of Section 562.”

Le Prell v. State (1960) fladistctapp “Section 562.23, F.S.A., under which petitioner was convicted, makes it a crime for two or more persons to conspire to violate any of the provisions of the beverage law, and provides that if the act conspired to be done would be a misdemeanor under the provisions of the beverage…”

Damar Corp. v. Lee (1963) fladistctapp · cites it 2× “Section 562.23, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., makes it unlawful to conspire to-violate any of the provisions of the beverage law.”

Vaughn v. State (1967) fladistctapp · cites it 2× “Appellant was found guilty of the charge of conspiracy to violate Section 562.23, Florida Statutes, F.S.A. The evidence supports the verdict.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.