Hodgman v. People
New York Supreme Court
Error to the Orleans general sessions. The plaintiff in error was indicted in the sessions for selling liquor without a licence in the town of Barre, in that county. The indictment contained five counts, the first four of which were for several offences against the excise law as contained in the revised statutes.
Read the full summary
Error to the Orleans general sessions. The plaintiff in error was indicted in the sessions for selling liquor without a licence in the town of Barre, in that county. The indictment contained five counts, the first four of which were for several offences against the excise law as contained in the revised statutes. The fifth count charged that the defendant “ unlawfully did sell, by retail, intoxicating and spirituous liquors or wines, to wit: one gill of rum, one gill of brandy, one gill of whiskey, one gill of gin, one pint of strong beer and one pint of wine, to some person to the jurors…
1Per curiam
The first objection is unanswerable. Only one offence can be proved under each count. The court, therefore, committed an error to the prejudice of the defendant when they permitted the additional evidence to be given. For this reason alone the judgment must be reversed. But we are requested to express an opinion upon the question raised respecting the last count. That count contains all the facts necessary to be averred in a count under the revised statutes. It is true that certain matters are introduced showing that the pleader had in view the act of 1845, but these may be disregarded. We…
2Cited by7 opinions
- People Ex Rel. Tweed v. . LiscombNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Ingram v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1864
- People ex rel. Tweed v. LiscombNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- People v. AldrichMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
- Schwab v. PeopleNew York Supreme Court · 1875
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.