State v. Tissing
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from, Moniteau Circuit Court. — Hon. G-. W. Miller, Judge. The indictment in this case was based upon section 1, page 342, of the statutes of 1877, and charged that defendant “on or about the 1st day of November, 1877, at, etc., being then and there a druggist and dealer in drugs and medicines, did unlawfully sell intoxicating liquor in less quantity than one gallon, to-wit: one pint of whisky * * without taking out a license as a dramshop keeper, the same not being…
Read the full summary
Appeal from, Moniteau Circuit Court. — Hon. G-. W. Miller, Judge. The indictment in this case was based upon section 1, page 342, of the statutes of 1877, and charged that defendant “on or about the 1st day of November, 1877, at, etc., being then and there a druggist and dealer in drugs and medicines, did unlawfully sell intoxicating liquor in less quantity than one gallon, to-wit: one pint of whisky * * without taking out a license as a dramshop keeper, the same not being then and there sold for medicinal or sacramental purposes.”
1Opinion of the Court
I
Sherwood, C. J.
The indictment is well enough. It follows the language of the statute.
II
We reverse the judgment because it does not appear when the offense charged was committed. If the evidence had shown that the offense occurred within one year next before the finding of the indictment, this would have sufficed. The only testimony as to the time of selling was this : “ I bought a pint of whisky of Tissing on the 4th of January, for medicine.” This evidence does not state when the violation of law took place, nor are any data given from which the time of the occurrence can reasonably be…
2Cited by5 opinions
- State ex rel. Rinne v. GerberSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
- Ex Parte Williams v. RobertsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1936
- State v. KnolleMissouri Court of Appeals · 1901
- State v. SauerburgerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1895
- State v. GreenspanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1897