220 2 .15 Declaratory Ruling Request

8/16/2019 220 2 .15 Declaratory Ruling Request

1/9

Conservation and Natural Resources Chapter 220-1-3

ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION

AND

NATURAL RESOURCES

ADMINISTRATIVE CODE

GENERAL PROVISIONS

CHAPTER 220-1-3

PETITION FOR ADOPTION OF RULES

TABLE OF CONTENTS

220-1-3-.01 Petition For Adoption Of Rules

220-1-3-.01 Petition For Adoption Of Rules.

(1) Any person who wishes to propose that theDepartment of Conservation and Natural Resources adopt, amend, orrepeal any rule shall submit said proposal in the following form:

PETITION FOR ADOPTION OF RULE

1. Petitioner

Name: ___Eddie Maxwell___________________________________

Address: ___[edited out____________

Phone: ___[edited out]_____________

2. Character of Change

I propose that the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

A. ( ) adopt the following new rule.B. ( ) amend Rule___________________as follows.

C. (X ) repeal Rule__ 220-2-.12 _ Game Bag, Hunting Coat, Etc., Shall be Open to Inspection __in total.

3. Text of Proposed RuleIf you checked box "A" above, type the rule you propose.If you checked box "B" above, type the currently effectiverule, adding any proposed language. Proposed new language should

Supp. 6/30/93 1-3-1


2/9

Chapter 220-1-3 Conservation and Natural Resources

be underlined and proposed deletions should be stricken through.If you checked box "C" above, skip this and go to Part 4.

4. Purpose of Change

Briefly describe what the effect of this change will be, andwhy you believe the change should be made.

The rule violates our constitutions.

5. Signature ddie Maxwell 12/31/2015 ____________________

Petitioner Date [corrected to 12/31/2015 em]

(2) The Department shall consider the petition, andshall within sixty (60) days after submission of the petition,

either deny the petition in writing on the merits, stating itsreasons for the denial, or initiate rulemaking proceedings inaccordance with Code of Alabama 1975, § 41-22-5.

Author:Statutory Authority: Code of Ala. 1975,§§9-2-12, 41-22-8.History: Filed September 30, 1982.

Supp. 6/30/93 1-3-2


3/9

Petition for a declaratory ruling by the Alabama Department of

Conservation and Natural Resources on the validity of Department rule

220-2-.12 Game Bag, Hunting Coat, Etc., Shall be Open to Inspection.

220-2-.12 Game Bag, Hunting Coat, Etc., Shall be Open to Inspection

(1) Pursuant to the Code of Alabama, 1975, Sections 9-11-259 and 9-11-85, which provided ineffect that all game birds, animals or fish taken or killed in this State must at all times be carried

or transported openly and that all game birds, animals or fish carried or transported in an illegal

manner shall be confiscated and disposed of under regulations by the Commissioner; any live

box, holding box, game bag, hunting coat, camping equipment, or like receptacles, or any

automobile or boat used for the carrying or holding of any fish, game birds, or game animals or

any gun or fishing tackle used in hunting or fishing shall be subject to inspection by officers of

the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources at all times upon proper identification of

said officer. Any person who refuses to allow inspection of the above named articles shall be in

violation of this regulation and shall be punished as provided by law.

Petition is submitted in the absence of the required rules prescribing

the form of such petitions and the procedure for their submission,

consideration and disposition, or prescribing the circumstances in

which rulings shall or shall not be issued (C.O.A. Section 41-22-11(a)).

22012.01 Declaratory Rulings.

(1) The Department may issue declaratory rulings to any person substantially affected by a

Rule with respect to the validity of the Rule, or with respect to the applicability to any

person, property, or state of facts of any rule or statute enforceable by the Department, orwith respect to the meaning and scope of any order of the Department. Such rulings shall

be issued provided:

(a) The petitioner makes his request in writing.

Petitioner Eddie Maxwell (petitioner) does hereby request in writing the Alabama Department of

Conservation and Natural Resources (Department) to issue a declaratory ruling on the validity of

rule 220-2-.12 Game Bag, Hunting Coat, Etc., Shall be Open to Inspection.

(b) The petitioner shows that he is substantially affected by the Rule in question.

Petition for repeal of the rule was submitted in compliance with Department rule 220-1-.03 bythe petitioner on December 31, 2015. Petitioner held that the rule violates our constitutions. The

petition for repeal of the rule was denied in writing by Commissioner Gunter Guy in a letter to

the petitioner dated January 22, 2016.

Petitioner's fundament rights to be free from unreasonable and unwarranted search and seizure as

enumerated in the Constitution of the United States of America, Amendment Four and the

Constitution of Alabama 1901, Article I, Section 5 are substantially affected by the rule.


4/9

"… It must be recognized that whenever a police officer accosts an individual and

restrains his freedom to walk away, he has "seized" that person. And it is nothing

less than sheer torture of the English language to suggest that a careful exploration

of the outer surfaces of a person's clothing all over his or her body in an attempt to

find weapons is not a "search." Moreover, it is simply fantastic to urge that such a

procedure performed in public by a policeman while the citizen stands helpless,perhaps facing a wall with his hands raised, is a 'petty indignity'. It is a serious

intrusion upon the sanctity of the person, which may inflict great indignity and arouse

strong resentment, and it is not to be undertaken lightly."

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968)

"Such a holding is entirely consistent with our decision in Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S.

491, 103 S.Ct. 1319, 75 L.Ed.2d 229 (1983),where we held that when an officer, without

reasonable suspicion or probable cause, approaches an individual, the individual has a

right to ignore the police and go about his business. Id., at 498, 103 S.Ct. 1319. And any

`refusal to cooperate, without more, does not furnish the minimal level of objective

justification needed for a detention or seizure.' Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429, 437, 111S.Ct. 2382, 115 L.Ed.2d 389 (1991).

Ex parte James, 797 So. 2d 413 - Ala: Supreme Court 2000

Code of Alabama 1975

Section 13A-6-25

Criminal coercion.

(a) A person commits the crime of criminal coercion if, without legal authority, hethreatens to confine, restrain or to cause physical injury to the threatened person or

another, or to damage the property or reputation of the threatened person or another withintent thereby to induce the threatened person or another against his will to do anunlawful act or refrain from doing a lawful act.(b) Criminal coercion is a Class A misdemeanor.(Acts 1977, No. 607, p. 812, §2125.)

(c) Sufficient facts are supplied in the request to permit the Department to make a

valid determination.

Petitioner's fundament rights to be free from unreasonable and unwarranted search and seizure asenumerated in the Constitution of the United States of America, Amendment Four and the

Constitution of Alabama 1901, Article I, Section 5 render the rule facially invalid. The standard

for allowing an investigative stop (a "Terry stop") is whether there is a reasonable suspicion that

"the person being stopped has engaged in some type of criminal activity."

"… it is necessary "first to focus upon the governmental interest which allegedly justifies

official intrusion upon the constitutionally protected interests of the private citizen," for

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14806767433216666666&q=%22reasonable+suspicion%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2000&as_yhi=2010https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14806767433216666666&q=%22reasonable+suspicion%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2000&as_yhi=2010https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14806767433216666666&q=%22reasonable+suspicion%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2000&as_yhi=2010https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14806767433216666666&q=%22reasonable+suspicion%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2000&as_yhi=2010https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6720605482047332075&q=%22reasonable+suspicion%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2000&as_yhi=2010https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6720605482047332075&q=%22reasonable+suspicion%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2000&as_yhi=2010https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6720605482047332075&q=%22reasonable+suspicion%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2000&as_yhi=2010https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6720605482047332075&q=%22reasonable+suspicion%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2000&as_yhi=2010https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6720605482047332075&q=%22reasonable+suspicion%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2000&as_yhi=2010https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6720605482047332075&q=%22reasonable+suspicion%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2000&as_yhi=2010https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14806767433216666666&q=%22reasonable+suspicion%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2000&as_yhi=2010https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14806767433216666666&q=%22reasonable+suspicion%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2000&as_yhi=2010


5/9

there is "no ready test for determining reasonableness other than by balancing the need to

search [or seize] against the invasion which the search [or seizure] entails." Camara v.

Municipal Court, 387 U. S. 523, 534-535, 536-537 (1967). And in justifying the

particular intrusion the police officer must be able to point to specific and articulable

facts which, taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant

that intrusion."

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968)

"…The United States Supreme Court in Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20L.Ed.2d 889 (1968), held that "a police officer may, in appropriate circumstances and inan appropriate manner, approach a person for purposes of investigating possible criminal behavior even though there is no probable cause to make an arrest." 392 U.S. at 22, 88S.Ct. at 1880. The standard for allowing a Terry stop is whether there is a reasonablesuspicion that "the person being stopped has engaged in some type of criminal activity."Webb v. State, 500 So.2d 1280, 1281 (Ala.Crim.App.),cert. denied, 500 So.2d 1282(Ala.1986)."

Ex parte Carpenter, 592 So.2d 627, 629 (Ala.1991).

Petitioner holds that it is well settled that searches and seizures unsupported by a warrant or probable cause are unconstitutional outside of well-established exceptions recognized under thelaw.

Notwithstanding the United States Supreme Court's assertion that its cases on the subjectof the extent of a search which may be made without a warrant following a lawful arrest"cannot be satisfactory reconciled,"[1] it now seems to be fairly well established that thereare at least six exceptions under which warrantless searches have been held valid, viz:

(1) In "plain view," see Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443, 91 S.Ct. 2022, 29L.Ed.2d 564 (1971);

(2) With "consent" voluntarily, intelligently and knowingly given, see Bumper v. NorthCarolina, 391 U.S. 543, 88 S.Ct. 1788, 20 L.Ed.2d 797 (1968)and Johnson v. Zerbst, 304U.S. 458, 58 S.Ct. 1019, 82 L.Ed. 1461 (1938);

(3) As "incident to a lawful arrest," see Abel v. United States, 362 U.S. 217, 80 S.Ct. 683,4 L.Ed.2d 668 (1960); Draper v. United States, 358 U.S. 307, 79 S.Ct. 329, 3 L.Ed.2d327 (1959);

(4) In "hot pursuit" or "emergency" situations, see Warden v. Hayden, 387 U.S. 294, 87S.Ct. 1642, 18 L.Ed.2d 782 (1967); Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 68 S.Ct. 367,92 L.Ed. 436 (1947); State v. Sutton, (Mo.1970) 454 S.W.2d 481;

(5) Where "exigent circumstances" exist coincidental with "probable cause" (as in thecase of movables), see Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42, 90 S.Ct. 1975, 26 L.Ed.2d419 (1970)[2]; and,

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2317094957132474824&q=%22investigatory+stop%22&hl=en&as_sdt=206https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2317094957132474824&q=%22investigatory+stop%22&hl=en&as_sdt=206https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2317094957132474824&q=%22investigatory+stop%22&hl=en&as_sdt=206https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2317094957132474824&q=%22investigatory+stop%22&hl=en&as_sdt=206https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2317094957132474824&q=%22investigatory+stop%22&hl=en&as_sdt=206https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2317094957132474824&q=%22investigatory+stop%22&hl=en&as_sdt=206https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17773604035873288886&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17773604035873288886&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17773604035873288886&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17773604035873288886&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17773604035873288886&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17773604035873288886&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11222126007494736355&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11222126007494736355&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14189209146515891830&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14189209146515891830&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13521344027758242646&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13521344027758242646&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6908252693682553814&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1#[1]https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6908252693682553814&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1#[1]https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13960360378186505490&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13960360378186505490&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16511836447499642189&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16511836447499642189&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11009897881566368743&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11009897881566368743&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12020591751465624112&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12020591751465624112&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4514954111779941288&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4514954111779941288&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=91164524422769366&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=91164524422769366&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12095002551234782978&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12095002551234782978&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2356265206898046797&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2193054308612397767&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2193054308612397767&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6908252693682553814&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1#[2]https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6908252693682553814&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1#[2]https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6908252693682553814&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1#[2]https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6908252693682553814&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1#[2]https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2193054308612397767&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2193054308612397767&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2356265206898046797&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12095002551234782978&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12095002551234782978&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=91164524422769366&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=91164524422769366&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4514954111779941288&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4514954111779941288&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12020591751465624112&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12020591751465624112&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11009897881566368743&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11009897881566368743&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16511836447499642189&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16511836447499642189&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13960360378186505490&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13960360378186505490&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6908252693682553814&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1#[1]https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13521344027758242646&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14189209146515891830&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14189209146515891830&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11222126007494736355&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17773604035873288886&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17773604035873288886&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17773604035873288886&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17773604035873288886&q=%22Terry+v.+Ohio%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2011https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2317094957132474824&q=%22investigatory+stop%22&hl=en&as_sdt=206https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2317094957132474824&q=%22investigatory+stop%22&hl=en&as_sdt=206


6/9

(6) In "stop and frisk" situations, see Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.889 (1968).

Daniels v. State, 276 So. 2d 441 - Ala: Supreme Court 1973

A warrantless search, as Martin conducted, is per se unreasonable under the FourthAmendment to the United States Constitution, subject only to a few specific exceptionsrecognized under the law, and the burden is on the State in a case such as this to showthat one or more of those exceptions is applicable. Kinard v. State, 335 So.2d 924(Ala.1976). Those well-established exceptions to a warrantless search are: (1) plain view;(2) consent; (3) incident to lawful arrest; (4) hot pursuit or emergency situations; (5)exigent circumstances coincidental with probable cause; and (6) stop-and-frisk situations. Daniels v. State, 290 Ala. 316, 276 So.2d 441 (1973). See also Wilkinson v. State, 374So.2d 400 (Ala.1979); Spann v. State, 494 So.2d 716 (Ala.Crim.App.1985); Vogel v.State, 426 So.2d 863 (Ala.Crim. App.1980). "Under the rule declared by the SupremeCourt of the United States in Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 81 S.Ct. 1684, 6 L.Ed.2d 1081

[(1961)], all evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the Constitution isinadmissible in a state court." Loyd v. State, 279 Ala. 447, 452, 186 So.2d 731, 736(1966).

Ex parte Kelley, 870 So. 2d 711 - Ala: Supreme Court 2003

In Adams v. State, 815 So.2d 578, 580-81 (Ala.2001),this Court recognized the standardfor determining the existence of probable cause, stating:

"In Woods v. State, 695 So.2d 636 (Ala.Crim.App.1996),the Court of Criminal Appealsexplained the standard for determining the existence of probable cause:"`"Whether there is probable cause [to] merit a warrantless search and seizure is to be

determined by the totality of the circumstances. Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 103 S.Ct.2317, 76 L.Ed.2d 527 (1983). `Probable cause exists where all the facts andcircumstances within the officer's knowledge are sufficient to warrant a person ofreasonable caution to conclude that an offense has been or is being committed and thatcontraband would be found in the place to be searched.' Sheridan v. State, 591 So.2d 129,130 (Ala.Crim.App. 1991)."" ̀State v. Stallworth, 645 So.2d 323, 325[(Ala.Crim.App.1994)]. . . . "When we speak of probable cause, we are dealing with probabilities which are factual and practical considerations of everyday experience."[Sterling v. State, 421 So.2d 1375, 1381 (Ala.Crim.App.1982)].'

"695 So.2d at 640 (citations omitted)."

State v. Clayton, 155 So. 3d 290 - Ala: Supreme Court 2014

(d) The request arises from an actual question or controversy.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17773604035873288886&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17773604035873288886&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2929586030296754049&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2929586030296754049&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2929586030296754049&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2929586030296754049&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6908252693682553814&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6908252693682553814&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2845589421326355012&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2845589421326355012&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2845589421326355012&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2845589421326355012&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2446863016718611204&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2446863016718611204&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2446863016718611204&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1666930486353334088&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1666930486353334088&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1666930486353334088&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1666930486353334088&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=589965672959279882&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=589965672959279882&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=589965672959279882&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=589965672959279882&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14789181236447797454&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14789181236447797454&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14789181236447797454&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14789181236447797454&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14789181236447797454&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10953949422230279276&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10953949422230279276&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10953949422230279276&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13564943324595471505&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13564943324595471505&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13564943324595471505&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12877848434623819956&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12877848434623819956&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12877848434623819956&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12877848434623819956&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7600342166922919584&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7600342166922919584&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7600342166922919584&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7600342166922919584&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13807743422447577516&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13807743422447577516&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13807743422447577516&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11116900084884899115&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11116900084884899115&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11116900084884899115&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13564943324595471505&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13564943324595471505&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11116900084884899115&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13807743422447577516&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13807743422447577516&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7600342166922919584&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7600342166922919584&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12877848434623819956&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12877848434623819956&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12877848434623819956&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13564943324595471505&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10953949422230279276&q=vehicle+probable+cause+%22probable+cause%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64&as_ylo=2012https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14789181236447797454&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14789181236447797454&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=589965672959279882&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=589965672959279882&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1666930486353334088&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1666930486353334088&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2446863016718611204&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2845589421326355012&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2845589421326355012&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6908252693682553814&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2929586030296754049&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2929586030296754049&q=+Ornelas+v.+United+States,+517+U.S.+690,+695+(1996)&hl=en&as_sdt=4,64https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17773604035873288886&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17773604035873288886&q=vehicle+probable+cause+search&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1


7/9

Petitioner holds that the rule defines as a new criminal offense the exercise of the enumerated

right to hunt (Constitution of Alabama 1901, Amendment 597 ) without surrendering the

fundamental right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures (Constitution of the United

States, Amendment Four and Constitution of Alabama 1901, Article I, Section 5).

… “We have said in a variety of contexts that "the government may not deny a benefit to

a person because he exercises a constitutional right." Regan v. Taxation With

Representation of Wash., 461 U.S. 540, 545, 103 S.Ct. 1997, 76 L.Ed.2d 129 (1983). See

also, e.g., Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights, Inc., 547 U.S. 47,

59-60, 126 S.Ct. 1297, 164 L.Ed.2d 156 (2006); Rutan v. Republican Party of Ill., 497

U.S. 62, 78, 110 S.Ct. 2729, 111 L.Ed.2d 52 (1990). In Perry v. Sindermann, 408 U.S.

593, 92 S.Ct. 2694, 33 L.Ed.2d 570 (1972),for example, we held that a public college

would violate a professor's freedom of speech if it declined to renew his contract because

he was an outspoken critic of the college's administration. And in Memorial Hospital v.

Maricopa County, 415 U.S. 250, 94 S.Ct. 1076, 39 L.Ed.2d 306 (1974),we concluded

that a county impermissibly burdened the right to travel by extending healthcare benefits

only to those indigent sick who had been residents of the county for at least one year.Those cases reflect an overarching principle, known as the unconstitutional conditions

doctrine, that vindicates the Constitution's enumerated rights by preventing the

government from coercing people into giving them up.” …

Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Mgmt. Dist., 133 S. Ct. 2586 - Supreme Court 2013

Petitioner holds that the Department violates theConstitution of Alabama 1901, Article III

Distribution of Powers of Government by assuming powers held exclusively by the legislative

branch of government to define new crimes. The rule of the Department declares,"… Any

person who refuses to allow inspection of the above named articles shall be in violation of this

regulation and shall be punished as provided by law." Violations of rules of the Department aredefined by law as class C misdemeanor criminal offenses (C.O.A. Section 9-1-4).

"It is a fundamental rule of constitutional law that the lawmaking authority of thelegislature may not be delegated to any other department or agency, either public or private. State v. Vaughan, 30 Ala.App. 201, 4 So.2d 5 (Ala.Ct.App.1941). Therefore,when certain legislative powers are delegated to administrative or quasi-administrativeofficials, it is a prerequisite that adequate standards be established by the legislature sothat officials to whom the powers are delegated will not legislate but, rather, will carryout the legislative will. See, Commission on Medical Discipline v. Stillman, 291 Md. 390,435 A.2d 747 (1981). . . . ."As a general rule, the legislature may delegate to its own appointed administrativeagencies the authority to make such minor rules and regulations as are necessary orappropriate for administration or enforcement of its general statutes. State v. State Boardof Medical Examiners, 209 Ala. 9, 95 So. 295 (1923)."

Evers v. Board of Medical Examiners, 516 So.2d 650, 654-55 (Ala.Civ.App.1987). Thelegislature cannot delegate its authority to make law and an agency cannot legislate.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3052803876914092410&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3052803876914092410&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3052803876914092410&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3052803876914092410&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3881292757575809578&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3881292757575809578&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3881292757575809578&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5322176927652912012&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5322176927652912012&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5322176927652912012&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5322176927652912012&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4415013413682250783&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4415013413682250783&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4415013413682250783&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4415013413682250783&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5708642971402405103&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5708642971402405103&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5708642971402405103&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5708642971402405103&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=13992048008052431468&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=13992048008052431468&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=13992048008052431468&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13892086603952520017&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13892086603952520017&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13892086603952520017&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=7284654059977643686&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=7284654059977643686&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=7284654059977643686&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=7284654059977643686&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16385045873957277033&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16385045873957277033&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16385045873957277033&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=7284654059977643686&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=7284654059977643686&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13892086603952520017&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13892086603952520017&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=13992048008052431468&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5708642971402405103&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5708642971402405103&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4415013413682250783&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4415013413682250783&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5322176927652912012&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5322176927652912012&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3881292757575809578&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3881292757575809578&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3052803876914092410&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3052803876914092410&q=%22unconstitutional+conditions%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60&as_ylo=2013


8/9

Marcet v. Board of Plumbers Examination & Registration of Alabama, 249 Ala. 48, 29So.2d 333, 49-50 (1947); Alabama Public Service Commission v. Mobile Gas Co., 213Ala. 50, 61, 104 So. 538 (1925). Certainly, an "agency cannot be vested with power tocreate a criminal offense." Standard Oil Co. of Kentucky v. Limestone County, 220 Ala.231, 236, 124 So. 523 (1929). "An administrative agency cannot usurp legislative powers

or contravene a statute. Alabama State Milk Control Board v. Graham, 250 Ala. 49, 33So.2d 11 (1947). A regulation cannot subvert or enlarge upon statutory policy. JeffersonCounty Board of Education v. Alabama Board of Cosmetology, 380 So.2d 913 (Ala.Civ.App.1980)." Ex parte Jones Manufacturing Co., 589 So.2d 208, 210 (Ala.1991).

"`The true test and distinction whether a power is strictly legislative, or whether it isadministrative, and merely relates to the execution of the statute law, "is between thedelegation of power to make the law, which necessarily involves a discretion as to what itshall be, and conferring authority or discretion as to its execution to be exercised underand pursuance of the law." The first cannot be done. To the latter, no valid objection can be made.'" Heck v. Hall, 238 Ala. 274, 282, 190 So. 280 (1939).

Timmons v. City of Montgomery , 641 So. 2d 1263 - Ala: Cour t of Criminal Appeals 1993

[Gunter Guy for the defendant]

Petitioner holds that the rule attempts to enlarge on the intent of the legislature as clearly stated

in the referenced statutes in the rule. The expressed intent of the Legislature is for game that is

taken to be carried openly. The intent of the rule is to allow Department enforcement officers to

conduct searches and seizures without reasonable suspicion that a violation of the statutes has

been or is about to be committed or probable cause to warrant a legitimate search and seizure.

"It is settled law that the provisions of a statute will prevail in any case in which there is a

conflict between the statute and a . . . regulation.

"`It is axiomatic that administrative rules and regulations must be consistent with the

constitutional or statutory authority by which their promulgation is authorized. "A

regulation . . . which operates to create a rule out of harmony with the statute, is a mere

nullity." This is because an administrative board or agency is purely a creature of the

legislature, and has only those powers conferred upon it by its creator.'

"An administrative agency cannot usurp legislative powers or contravene a statute."

Ex parte Crestwood Hosp. & Nursing Home, Inc., 670 So. 2d 45, 47 (Ala. 1995)

(citations omitted; quoting Ex parte City of Florence, 417 So. 2d 191, 193-94 (Ala.1982), quoting in turn Manhattan Gen. Equip. Co. v. Commissioner, 297 U.S. 129, 134

(1936)).

IN RE EX PARTE CHAMBERS, Ala: Court of Civil Appeals 2013

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=15208392039417763062&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=15208392039417763062&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=15208392039417763062&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=13257913010117038912&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=13257913010117038912&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=13257913010117038912&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=13257913010117038912&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=16186017821534119948&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=16186017821534119948&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=16186017821534119948&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=16186017821534119948&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=5945040428063562932&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=5945040428063562932&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=5945040428063562932&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=5945040428063562932&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12549557914023194332&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12549557914023194332&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12549557914023194332&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12549557914023194332&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12549557914023194332&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12640050793306461745&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12640050793306461745&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12640050793306461745&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=5921532951400653876&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=5921532951400653876&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12087592341983809623&q=agency+cannot+usurp+legislative+powers+&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5015554134976954592&q=agency+cannot+usurp+legislative+powers+&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5015554134976954592&q=agency+cannot+usurp+legislative+powers+&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6168985056316390271&q=agency+cannot+usurp+legislative+powers+&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6168985056316390271&q=agency+cannot+usurp+legislative+powers+&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6168985056316390271&q=agency+cannot+usurp+legislative+powers+&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6168985056316390271&q=agency+cannot+usurp+legislative+powers+&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5015554134976954592&q=agency+cannot+usurp+legislative+powers+&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5015554134976954592&q=agency+cannot+usurp+legislative+powers+&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12087592341983809623&q=agency+cannot+usurp+legislative+powers+&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1&as_ylo=2013http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=5921532951400653876&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12640050793306461745&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12549557914023194332&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12549557914023194332&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12549557914023194332&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=5945040428063562932&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=5945040428063562932&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=16186017821534119948&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=16186017821534119948&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=13257913010117038912&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=13257913010117038912&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=15208392039417763062&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?about=15208392039417763062&q=timmons+montgomery&hl=en&as_sdt=4,1


9/9

Petitioner holds that the earlier decision of the Commissioner to deny the petition to repeal the

rule should be overturned, an order should be issued for the rule to be repealed and the rule

should be held to be invalid.

Petitioner asks that all costs incurred by the petitioner in this matter be reimbursed to the

petitioner.

(2) Such rulings will be made in accordance with the Alabama Administrative Procedures

Act § 11, Code of Alabama 1975, §412211. Author: Statutory Authority: Code of Ala.

1975, §§9212, 41224. History: Filed September 30, 1982.

Signed: ____ ddie Maxwell____

Date:______February 8, 2016

Documents

220 2 .15 Declaratory Ruling Request