Everton v. District of Columbia

The District of Columbia (plaintiff) prosecuted Baker Everton (defendant) under a 1925 statute barring anyone from operating or controlling 'any vehicle' while intoxicated, where the statute broadly defined 'vehicle' as any wheeled appliance moved over a highway, including draft animals -- unlike other D.C. statutes specifically limited to motor vehicles. At trial, evidence showed Everton rode his bicycle drunk on a busy street, nearly hit a child in a crosswalk, lost control, and fell into the street. Everton was convicted and appealed, arguing the statute shouldn't cover bicycles because, read literally, it would also absurdly bar an intoxicated pedestrian from merely holding or walking next to a bicycle.