Wolfe v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Mississippi Circuit Court; W. J. Driver, Judge; 1. There is no testimony that appellant was connected with or interested in the sale of the whisky. The fact that he was captain of the boat does not make him criminally responsible for violations of the law. 58 S. W. 343; 23 Cyc. 256-7; 9 So. 536. 2. The venue is not proved. The middle of the main channel is the boundary line. 40 Ark. 502; 147 U. S. 239; 5 Am.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Mississippi Circuit Court; W. J. Driver, Judge; 1. There is no testimony that appellant was connected with or interested in the sale of the whisky. The fact that he was captain of the boat does not make him criminally responsible for violations of the law. 58 S. W. 343; 23 Cyc. 256-7; 9 So. 536. 2. The venue is not proved. The middle of the main channel is the boundary line. 40 Ark. 502; 147 U. S. 239; 5 Am. St. 536; 123 111. 545. Island 37 is in Tennessee. 1. The testimony was sufficient to convince the jury that appellant was connected with, or interested in the sale. 38 Ark.…
1Opinion of the CourtFrauenthal, J.
This is an appeal from a judgment convicting the defendant of selling liquor without license. He urges that the judgment should be reversed, (1) because the evidence was insufficient to show that he sold or aided in making the sale of the liquor, or (2) to show the venue of the alleged offense; and (3) because the court erred in its rulings on certain instructions relative to the venue.
The sale was made on a boat in the Mississippi River off the Arkansas shore, opposite Mississippi County. The sole witness who testified on the trial of the case was the purchaser of the liquor. From his…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Bell v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- Cessill v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1883
- Henry v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1903
- McWilliams v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912