Eisenshank v. State

Appellant was charged by indictment with unlawfully maintaining and assisting in maintaining a common nuisance, under the prohibition law, in violation of §20, ch. 4, Acts 1917 p. 15.

He was tried by jury and found guilty.. On appeal, errors are assigned as follows: (1) The court erred in overruling the appellant’s motion to quash the indictment; (2) the court erred in overruling the appellant’s motion for a new trial.

The reasons given in support of the motion to quash the indictment are that the titles of the prohibition acts of 1917 and 1921, are not broad enough to include the offense…