People v. Minter
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtBishop, J.
The defendant sold a pint of whiskey, and as he had no license, he stands convicted on the charge that, by the sale, he had exercised a privilege and performed an act which a person holding a license might exercise and perform under the authority of his license. In support of Ms appeal from the judgment of conviction the defendant argues that as the sale took place at an hour when a licensee could not legally make a sale, it follows that he had not done an act which a holder of a license might perform. He further contends that it was not proved that the bottle which he sold contained whiskey,…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Dunlop v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- People v. AgnewCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
- Lewinsohn v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1921
- People v. Le DouxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- People v. BlackCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- People v. SchroederCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
- Griswold v. Department of Alcoholic Beverage ControlCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
- People v. HewlettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
- People v. IhmCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
- Oxman v. Department of Alcoholic Beverage ControlCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.