King v. State
Mississippi Supreme Court
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Grenada County. Hon. Samuel Powell, Judge. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court. The first charge for the State is clearly erroneous in several particulars: (1) The statement that “the question of how much it would require to produce intoxication should not be considered by the jury ” is certainly error. 6 Cent.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Grenada County. Hon. Samuel Powell, Judge. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court. The first charge for the State is clearly erroneous in several particulars: (1) The statement that “the question of how much it would require to produce intoxication should not be considered by the jury ” is certainly error. 6 Cent. L. J. 376. Again : (2) this instruction states it to the jury as a fact, that “ mixing tonics — as, barks —into (?) it” (the compound) is “ an evasion or subterfuge.” The language is : “ The evasion or subterfuge, such as…
1Opinion of the CourtCooper, J.
The appellants were indicted in the Circuit Court of Grenada County for unlawfully selling vinous and spirituous liquors in less quantities than one gallon.
The evidence showed that the defendants sold, in quantities of from a pint to a quart, a compound called “ Home Bitters,” which the defendants claimed was a proprietary medicine, which, though containing alcohol, it was lawful for them to sell without obtaining license to retail, under the provisions of the Code governing the retailing of vinous and spirituous liquors.
The evidence introduced by the defendants themselves shows that the…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Carl v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
- Young v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1924
- Bertrand v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1895
- Bacot v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1908
- Burnstein v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1932
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.