West v. State
Mississippi Supreme Court
From the circuit court of Pike county. Hon. W. P. Cassedy, Judge. Appellant, West, was convicted of unlawful retailing. The indictment, in the first count, charges that he did, on the fifteenth day of December, 1892, in the county of Pike, unlawfully sell vinous and spirituous liquors, he not then and there having any authority so to do.
Read the full summary
From the circuit court of Pike county. Hon. W. P. Cassedy, Judge. Appellant, West, was convicted of unlawful retailing. The indictment, in the first count, charges that he did, on the fifteenth day of December, 1892, in the county of Pike, unlawfully sell vinous and spirituous liquors, he not then and there having any authority so to do. The second count charges that the said West, on the day aforesaid, being a citizen of Louisiana, “did come into the county of Pike, state of Mississippi (the sale of liquors being prohibited by law in said county), and did then and there, in said county,…
1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, C. J.
The first count in the indictment is good, for it charges a sale of liquor without authority of law, and that is an offense under the general law. Norton v. State, 65 Miss., 297.
The second count, tested by the law in force prior to the *601code of 1892, is bad, for not averring that the “local option” law of 1886 had been put in force in the county. Norton v. State, supra.
Chapter 37 of the code of 1892, on dram-shops, except as to licenses obtained after April 2,1892, was not in force until November 1,1892, and has no influence on this indictment.
The demurrer was properly overruled, because it…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Norton v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1887
3Cited by1 opinion
- People v. MuellerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914