State v. Burkett
Supreme Court of Kansas
Appeal from. Kingman District Court. Prosecution for a violation of the prohibitory liquor law. From a verdict of guilty and a judgment thereon, at the September term, 1892, the defendant, Bwrkett, appeals. The opinion states the facts. The motion to quash the first three counts of the information should have been sustained. The information was indefinite and uncertain, and the counts referred to did not negative the presumption of sales according to law.
Read the full summary
Appeal from. Kingman District Court. Prosecution for a violation of the prohibitory liquor law. From a verdict of guilty and a judgment thereon, at the September term, 1892, the defendant, Bwrkett, appeals. The opinion states the facts. The motion to quash the first three counts of the information should have been sustained. The information was indefinite and uncertain, and the counts referred to did not negative the presumption of sales according to law. In short, the exceptions mentioned in the statute were not negatived ; and hence, as far as the case at bar was concerned, the information…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Allen, J.:
The defendant appeals from a judgment sentencing him to fine and imprisonment for a violation of the prohibitory law. The jury found him guilty as charged in the third count of the information. This count charges that the defendant “did then and there unlawfully sell and barter spirituous, malt, vinous, fermented and other intoxicating liquors, contrary to the statute in such cases made and provided.” The sufficiency of the information was challenged by a motion to quash, refusal to plead, and objection to the introduction of any testimony,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. TannerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1893
- State v. RatnerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1890
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. SnyderCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1899
- State v. ConleyCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1895