Commonwealth v. Vaughn
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 88 — 1. If the offenses charged are so distinct that the evidence of the one will not support a conviction under an indictment for the other, then the one conviction will not bar the other. Ruble v. State, 10 S. W. Rept, (Ark.), 262; State v. Faulkner, 39 La. (Ann.), 811; Right v. State, 17 Texas Appeals, 152.
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE GUFFY
delivered tiie opinion of the court.
The appellee, Reuben Vaughn, was indicted by the grand jury of Green county for furnishing liquor to a minor with-, out legal authority, and tried and fined $50 for said offense. At the same term of court he was indicted for selling spirituous liquors in violation of the local option law of said Green county, and after the conviction aforesaid the last named indictment was called for trial and appellee pleaded former jeopardy as well as not guilty. The selling was proven and it was admitted by appellee that the local option law was in force in…
2Cited by10 opinions
- State v. MarchindoMontana Supreme Court · 1922
- Hughes v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1909
- Robinson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1912
- Easley v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1958
- State v. WinterMontana Supreme Court · 1955
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.