State v. Blackwell
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal by defendant from Bay, J., at tbe March Term, 1920, of HENDERSON. . Tbis is a criminal action, tried- upon an indictment cbarging tbe unlawful manufacture of intoxicating liquor. State’s EvideNce. Sheriff M. Allard Case: I know John Blackwell. He lives in tbe eastern part of Henderson County. I saw him at a blockade still on 3 January, 1920, over at Big Hungary, ten miles from here in tbis county. Mr. Hill and Mr.- Lyda were with me at tbe time.
Read the full summary
Appeal by defendant from Bay, J., at tbe March Term, 1920, of HENDERSON. . Tbis is a criminal action, tried- upon an indictment cbarging tbe unlawful manufacture of intoxicating liquor. State’s EvideNce. Sheriff M. Allard Case: I know John Blackwell. He lives in tbe eastern part of Henderson County. I saw him at a blockade still on 3 January, 1920, over at Big Hungary, ten miles from here in tbis county. Mr. Hill and Mr.- Lyda were with me at tbe time. Blackwell bad a complete outfit, except tbat be bad no cap or worm for tbe still. "When we found him be bad about three bushels of meal in two…
1Opinion of the CourtAlleN, J.
The evidence is sufficient to support the verdict, and goes beyond proof of preparation to commit the crime of manufacturing intoxicating liquor.
It is true the cap and worm were not present, but they would not be needed for a week, and in the meantime the defendant was engaged in one of the processes of manufacture.
*735He bad not produced any of tbe completed product, but be was manufacturing it as rapidly as be could, knowing tbat tbe cap and worm would be available wben tbe beer was ready for distillation.
Tbe sheriff also testified: /‘Tbe still bad been used before,” wbieb, in tbe absence of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. . PerrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1920
3Cited by2 opinions
- Holford v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
- State v. ArnoldSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1924