Holmes v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Ouachita Circuit Court; C. W. Smith, Judge; 1. The evidence is not legally sufficient to sustain the verdict.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Ouachita Circuit Court; C. W. Smith, Judge; 1. The evidence is not legally sufficient to sustain the verdict. There is no evidence that appellant sold any whiskey, or that he was interested in the sale of any. 23 Cyc. 284; 124 Ark. 585; 67 Ark. 163. 2. It is the duty of the eourt to set aside the verdict when it is against the weight of the evidence, and not wai'ranted by the evidence. 98 Ark. 336; 65 Id. 279; 106 S. W. 1125; 29 Cyc. 832. Set forth all the evidence in the case and submit it to the court to determine whether the proof is sufficient.
1Opinion of the CourtHumphreys, J.
Appellant was indicted, tried and convicted in the Ouachita circuit court of the crime of selling whiskey, and his punishment fixed at one year in the State penitentiary. Proper steps were taken and an appeal has been prosecuted to this court.
The question presented by the appeal is whether the evidence is sufficient to sustain the verdict.
In determining this question, the strongest probative force must be given the evidence in favor of the verdict. Interpreting the evidence in its strongest aspect, it disclosed that the appellant was a joint owner in liquors sold, without his knowledge and…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Bobo v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- State v. Bach Liquor Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1899
- Scoggin v. City of MorriltonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1916
3Cited by1 opinion
- Sluder v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1924