State v. Cutting
Clackamas County Circuit Court, Oregon
The defendant was indicted under the statute which makesNt a criminal offense for any person to “barter, sell or dispose of” spirituous liquors without a license. On the first trial thé jury failed to agree, and the case coming on a second time, the defendant’s counsel requested that the instructions be given in writing.
Read the full summary
The defendant was indicted under the statute which makesNt a criminal offense for any person to “barter, sell or dispose of” spirituous liquors without a license. On the first trial thé jury failed to agree, and the case coming on a second time, the defendant’s counsel requested that the instructions be given in writing. The evidence tended to show that the defendant kept a small grocery and variety store, and that it was his practice to give away liquor to those who made purchases from him, and that he frequently sold a stick of candy for. 12-J cents and gave the purchaser a drink of liquor.…
1Opinion of the Court
Upton, J".
The following instructions were given to the jury :
Gentlemen, of the jury : In a case of this kind, if the defendant claims to be licensed, it is his duty to prove that he has been licensed, and if he fails to do so, the jury must hold that he is not licensed.
In this case it is necessary for the prosecution to show that the defendant-sold or disposed of spirituous liquors in less quantity than-one quart; and to make out a case, the prosecution should show that liquor was disposed of by the defendant to Woodcock, the person named, in the indictment: but the time when the liquor was…
2Cited by3 opinions
- State v. RosascoOregon Supreme Court · 1922
- Downer's Administrator v. Zanesville BankOhio Supreme Court · 1833
- State v. PerkinsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1873