Vermont v. Conlin
Supreme Court of Vermont
Bill of rights. Gonstitutionality and validity of proceedings under the twenty-second section of the act of 1852, to prevent traffic in intoxicating liquor. Prosecution for selling liquor. Former conviction. Prosecution for selling intoxicating liquor contrary to law. The facts in the case and all the questions mooted in reference thereto sufficiently appear in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Redfield, Ch. J.
This was a prosecution before Charles L. Williams, Esq., one of the justices- of the peace, for the county of Rutland, under the twenty-second section of the act of 1852, entitled “ an act to prevent traffic in intoxicating liquors for the purpose of drinking.” The record of the justice stated that Michael Brislin was found intoxicated and disturbing the public peace, and being arrested under the twenty-second section of this act, and brought before him, testified, “ I drank some gin which I obtained at James Conlin’s. I obtained a pint…
2Cited by19 opinions
- McInerney v. City of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1892
- Parshall v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1911
- State v. O'NeilSupreme Court of Vermont · 1885
- Plimpton v. Town of SomersetSupreme Court of Vermont · 1860
- Loeb v. JenningsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1910
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.