Commonwealth v. Jarvis & Williams
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 42. — PROSECUTION AGAINST JARVIS & WILLIAMS FOR VIOLATING- LOCAL OPTION LAW. Appeal from Muhlenburg Circuit Court. W. P. Sandige, Circuit Judge. From a judgment sustaining a demurrer to the indictment the Commonwealth appeals.
Read the full summary
Case 42. — PROSECUTION AGAINST JARVIS & WILLIAMS FOR VIOLATING- LOCAL OPTION LAW. Appeal from Muhlenburg Circuit Court. W. P. Sandige, Circuit Judge. From a judgment sustaining a demurrer to the indictment the Commonwealth appeals. The indictment under consideration charges “the offense of unlawfully and wilfully selling b,y retail a beverage, liquid mixture or decoction, which produces intoxication, in territory in which the sale of spirituous, vinous or malt liquors is prohibited in accordance with the local option law, * * * did unlawfully and 'wilfully sell by retail to Z. T. Tate a…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Judge O’Rear
Reversing.
*336Appellees were indicted and tried under the charge of unlawfully and wilfully selling’ by retail a beverage, liquid mixture, or decoction which causes or produces intoxication, Which acts were alleged to have been committed in territory in which the sale of spirituous, vinous and malt liquors is prohibited in accordance with the local option law. A demurrer was sustained to the indictment.
The indictment is drawn in the language of the statute. Ordinarily, for a «purely statutory offense, as this is, the employment of the language of the statute is deemed…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Jones v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1898
3Cited by1 opinion
- Sizemore v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1910