D'Amico v. State
Supreme Court of Delaware
Joseph D’Amico was placed on trial in the court below, Heisel, J., sitting, under indictment No. 40, January term, 1916, for unlawfully selling intoxicating liquors. Verdict, guilty. Accused brings error. Affirmed.
Read the full summary
Joseph D’Amico was placed on trial in the court below, Heisel, J., sitting, under indictment No. 40, January term, 1916, for unlawfully selling intoxicating liquors. Verdict, guilty. Accused brings error. Affirmed. At the time of the commission of the offense charged in the indictment, the defendant held a liquor merchant’s license, under which he was authorized to sell, to be drunk off the premises, malt or brewed liquors in quantities not less than three quarts, or more than one barrel, and other intoxicating liquors in quantities not less than three quarts, nor more than five gallons. The…
1Opinion of the Court
Pennewill, C. J.,
after stating the facts, delivering the opinion of the court:
The assignments of error are nine in number, and are all covered by certain contentions made by the defendant in his brief, *601which will be considered by the court in the order in which they were argued.
The first and second contentions are as follows:(1) That the testimony produced by the state having failed to establish by clear, competent and sufficient evidence, the sale of a barrel of wine, the court should have directed a verdict for the defendant.(2) That the transaction involving a barrel of wine, which…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. MundyNew York Court of General Session of the Peace · 1909
- Dennis v. StateSuperior Court of Delaware · 1914
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. BiterSuperior Court of Delaware · 1955
- Hutchins v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1959
- State v. ThomasNew York Court of General Session of the Peace · 1950
- State v. ThomasSuperior Court of Delaware · 1950