State v. Mitchell
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Buchanan, J-, Chesterfield, April Term, 1899. Indictment against W. J. Mitchell for violating dispen-sar)'- law. The trial Judge instructed the jury as follows, omitting formal parts: So, then, Mr. Foreman, the defendant is upon trial under three counts in the dispensary law.
Read the full summary
Before Buchanan, J-, Chesterfield, April Term, 1899. Indictment against W. J. Mitchell for violating dispen-sar)'- law. The trial Judge instructed the jury as follows, omitting formal parts: So, then, Mr. Foreman, the defendant is upon trial under three counts in the dispensary law. Well, the State comes here and puts the prisoner to his plea, and the prisoner puts up the plea of “not guilty,” and calls upon the State to prove his guilt beyond all reasonable doubt; and the State takes that burden on herself and bears that all through the case, and the 'State must prove its case 'beyond all…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by-
Mr. Chief Justice McIver.
The defendant was tried under an indictment, containing three counts, for violating the statute usually known as the dispensary law. In the first count, the defendant was charged with selling- spirituous liquors to one W. R. Gainey, in violation of the first section of the dispensary law. in the second count, the charge is that the defendant, with certain other persons named therein (the defendant alone being on trial), did wilfully and unlawfully maintain and keep a certain place specified, where contraband alcoholic liquors…
2Cited by14 opinions
- State v. BighamSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1926
- State v. KnoxSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1914
- State v. SowellSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1910
- State v. GibertSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1941
- State v. MillsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1908
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.