People v. Garrett
Michigan Supreme Court
Excepiions before judgment from Eaton. (Hooker, J.)> Respondent was convicted of furnishing liquor to minor- The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMorse, J.
My reasons for affirming the conviction in this case are these:
The undisputed'facts are that the defendant sold, gave, and furnished to a boy 14 years old a bottle of beer, which the boy with other boys afterwards drank. The order for *488the beer, which purported to be signed by one William F„ Mayer, cuts no figure in the case. The defendant knew the boy was a minor, and gave him the liquor. The intent is plain from this fact. There, then, could be no mistake about the boy’s age. It cannot be considered that the defendant supposed the boy was 21.
The statute is not only aimed at the selling, but…
2Cited by13 opinions
- State v. AlvordIdaho Supreme Court · 1928
- People v. AntkoviakMichigan Court of Appeals · 2000
- People v. WelchMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- May Department Stores, Inc. v. Supervisor of Liquor ControlMissouri Court of Appeals · 1975
- State v. CummingsNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1957
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.