Legal Opinion

Olmstead v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided November 15, 1891PublishedCited by 1 opinion

From the City Court of Anniston. Tried before the Hon. B. F. Cassady.

1Opinion of the CourtMcCLELLAN, J.

The indictment in this case charges that Percy Olmstead sold spirituous, vinous or malt liquors, without a license, and contrary to law. To sustain the charge, it was essential to prove either a sale in any quantity less than a quart, or in any quantity if the liquor or any part of it was drunk on or about the premises. — Code § 4036.

The evidence on the trial was without conflict, or adverse inference, to the effect that the defendant, at one time, and as one transaction, sold to the State’s witness three pint bottles of beer for fifty cents, that being the regular price for three bottles,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. State v. BarronSupreme Court of Vermont · 1864

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. SpenceSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1910

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API