State v. Bruder
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Lafayette Criminal Court. — Hon. John E. Rye and, Judge. (1) We insist that said excluded evidence was perfectly competent and should have been permitted to go the jury on the questions of defendant’s mistake and belief as to the age of young Rathert. Whether or not such facts and circumstances as detailed in said excluded evidence would create the belief in the mind of the defendant that young Rathert was of full age, and that defendant was without fault.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Lafayette Criminal Court. — Hon. John E. Rye and, Judge. (1) We insist that said excluded evidence was perfectly competent and should have been permitted to go the jury on the questions of defendant’s mistake and belief as to the age of young Rathert. Whether or not such facts and circumstances as detailed in said excluded evidence would create the belief in the mind of the defendant that young Rathert was of full age, and that defendant was without fault. Bish. Stat. Cr. [2 Ed.] sec. 1022 and notes. “If one authorized to sell liquor to adults, and forbidden to sell it to…
1Opinion of the CourtGill, J.
The defendant, the keeper of a dramshop,' was indicted, tried and found guilty in the criminal court of Lafayette county, for having sold intoxicating liquors to one Henry Rathert, a minor, without the written consent of the parent of said minor, contrary to section 5454, Revised Statutes, as amended by act approved March 31, 1885.
The principal question raised by this appeal is, whether or not the keeper of a dramshop can escape the punishment prescribed by this statute, by showing his good faith, or absence of guilty intent, in selling intoxicating liquor to a minor; as for example, that the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Grant v. National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- State v. HartfielWisconsin Supreme Court · 1869
- Reich v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1879
- Faulks v. PeopleMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
- Goetz v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1872
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. SchullSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1938
- State v. SasseSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1894
- State v. FeldmanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
- Seele v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1909
- State v. GaryMissouri Court of Appeals · 1907
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.