State v. Simpson
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On exceptions by defendant. This is an indictment against the defendant, as a common seller of intoxicating liquors, under R. S., Chap. 29, Sec. 42. At the conclusion of State’s evidence, defendant requested the presiding Justice to direct a verdict in his favor, which request the Justice refused, and the defendant excepted thereto. The jury rendered a .verdict of guilty.
Read the full summary
On exceptions by defendant. This is an indictment against the defendant, as a common seller of intoxicating liquors, under R. S., Chap. 29, Sec. 42. At the conclusion of State’s evidence, defendant requested the presiding Justice to direct a verdict in his favor, which request the Justice refused, and the defendant excepted thereto. The jury rendered a .verdict of guilty. The defendant then filed a motion before the presiding Justice to set the verdict aside as against the law and the evidence, which motion the presiding Justice overruled, and defendant excepted to this ruling. The case is…
1Opinion of the CourtCornish, J.
The respondent was indicted as a common seller of ■ intoxicating liquors under R. S., Chap. 29, Sec. 42. After the State had introduced all its evidence the respondent requested the presiding Justice to direct a verdict in his favor on the ground of insufficient evidence. The presiding Justice refused to direct a verdict and exceptions were taken by the respondent to this ruling. The respondent introduced no evidence, the case was submitted to the jury, and a verdict of guilty was rendered. The respondent then filed a motion before the presiding Justice to set aside the verdict as against the…
2Cited by8 opinions
- State v. BobbSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1942
- State v. O'DonnellSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1932
- State v. HoffsesSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1952
- Labbe v. CyrSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1954
- Mills v. RichardsonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1927
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.