Bennett v. State
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from G-uadaloupe. The case was tried before Hon. John Ireland, one of the district judges. The defendants "were indicted as keepers of a grog-shop, under the Sunday law, for that they engaged in the retail of spirituous liquors on Sunday. The proof was that they were the owners of a liquor-shop, and that certain persons were seen to drink liquor there on Sunday.
Read the full summary
Appeal from G-uadaloupe. The case was tried before Hon. John Ireland, one of the district judges. The defendants "were indicted as keepers of a grog-shop, under the Sunday law, for that they engaged in the retail of spirituous liquors on Sunday. The proof was that they were the owners of a liquor-shop, and that certain persons were seen to drink liquor there on Sunday. The jury found them guilty, and assessed their fine each at0 $15. The facts are more minutely stated in the briefs' of counsel and opinion of the court. The defendants appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtLindsay, J.
We do not think the errors assigned in this case are sufficient to reverse it. The two main objections to the verdict and judgment are, that it does not appear that the indictment was presented in open court by the grand jury, and that the verdict and judgment were not responsive to the charge of the court. To the first we answer, every intendment must be indulged in favor of the authority for the action of the court below in the trial of the cause. To the second, we say the court properly charged that, if the jury should find the defendants guilty, they should assess a fine against th°em of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Gabel v. City of HoustonTexas Supreme Court · 1867
3Cited by5 opinions
- Allen v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1871
- Houston & Great Northern Railroad v. KuechlerTexas Supreme Court · 1872
- Parvin v. ByersCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1929
- Flynn v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1880
- Parvin v. ByersCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1929