State v. York
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
It appeared that the liquors alleged to have been kept for sale were ordinary wine and whiskey. After the state bad rested, the defendant moved that a verdict of not guilty be directed, upon the ground that the state had introduced no evidence that the wine and whiskey were intoxicating, and also because it did not appear that the liquors contained more than one per cent of alcohol. The motion was denied, and the defendant excepted.
1Opinion of the CourtBingham, J.
“ If any person, not being an agent of a town or city for the purpose of selling spirit, shall sell or keep for sale in any quantity spirituous or distilled liquors, rectified spirits, vinous,-fermented, brewed, or malt liquors, wines, or any beverage, by whatever name called, containing more than one per cent of alcohol by volume at sixty degrees Fahrenheit, he shall be fined,” etc. P. S., c. 112, s. 15, as amended by Laws 1905, c. 116. The defendant was indicted under this statute for unlawfully keeping for sale wine and whiskey.
No objection was taken to the form in which the charge was…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Kettering v. City of JacksonvilleIllinois Supreme Court · 1869
- Adler v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1876
- State v. MungerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1843
- Watson v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1876
- State v. HecklerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Fine v. MoranSupreme Court of Florida · 1917
- In Re SpeerIdaho Supreme Court · 1933
- United States v. R. C. Boeckel & Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1915
- State v. LabrecqueSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1916
- Ex Parte PeedeCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1914
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.