State v. Pope
Missouri Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtBradley, J.
Defendant was charged by information with having in his possession “a still, doubler, worm, wormtub, a mash tub, a fermenting tub used and fitted for use in the production of intoxicating liquor,” contrary of the provision of section 6588, Revised Statutes 1919, as amended, Laws 1921, p. 414. The jury were instructed that if they found from the evidence that the defendant unlawfully had in his possession “a worm, wormtub, or mash tub used or fit for use in the production of intoxicating liquor” then they would find defendant guilty. Defendant was found guilty and his punishment fixed at a…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Boyd v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Adams v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- National Safe Deposit Co. v. SteadSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Gindrat v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1891
- People v. . AdamsNew York Court of Appeals · 1903
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. TunnellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1924
- Hantz v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1929