Nixon v. State
Citation | 138 N.W. 136,92 Neb. 115 |
Decision Date | 18 October 1912 |
Docket Number | 17,546 |
Parties | ARTHUR W. NIXON v. STATE OF NEBRASKA |
Court | Supreme Court of Nebraska |
ERROR to the district court for Richardson county: JOHN B. RAPER JUDGE. Affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
Edwin Falloon, for plaintiff in error.
Grant G. Martin, Attorney General, and Frank E. Edgerton, contra.
The plaintiff in error, hereafter called the defendant, was tried in the district court for Richardson county on an information containing four counts, in each of which he was charged with the crime of selling spirituous and intoxicating liquors called whiskey without a license. He was found not guilty on the first two counts, and guilty as charged in the third and fourth counts of the information. He was sentenced to pay a fine of $ 300 on each count, together with the costs of prosecution, and to stand committed until the fines and costs were paid. To reverse the judgment of the district court he has brought the case here by a petition in error.
Defendant's first contention is that the evidence is wholly insufficient to sustain the verdict. It appears that the third count of the information charged that defendant did, on or about the 26th day of March, 1911, in the county of Richardson, state of Nebraska, unlawfully and wilfully sell to one Robert Ankrom certain spirituous and intoxicating liquors, to wit one gill of whiskey, without having obtained a license therefor. The abstract, record and briefs show that upon the trial Ankrom testified, in substance, that he was living in Barada on the 27th day of March, 1911, where he had always lived; that he was acquainted with the defendant, Arthur Nixon; that he did not remember whether he was in there on the 26th day of March of that year, but that he visited Nixon's place of business very frequently and frequently drank there. He said: The witness also testified on cross-examination that he never bought any whiskey at Nixon's place of business within the last 18 months. On redirect examination the witness further said:
The fourth count of the information charged that the defendant, in the county of Richardson, and state of Nebraska, on or about the 28th day of March, 1911, did unlawfully and wilfully sell to one Albert Davis certain spirituous and intoxicating liquors, to wit, one gill of whiskey, without having first complied with the laws of the state of Nebraska, and obtained a license therefor. To support that count of the information Albert Davis testified, in substance, as follows: I live north, just across the line of Nemaha county. Was living there during the month of last March. I was in Barada nearly every day along through March, at least three times a week. Am acquainted with Arthur Nixon, and have been in his place of business. I have purchased of him groceries, some hardware and drugs. On or about the 25th day of March I bought something I suppose was whiskey. It was red looking stuff. It was a poor article of stuff whatever it was. It tasted to me like it might have been whiskey, a poor grade of whiskey. Well, if a man would drink enough of it I suppose it would make him crazy. I bought this stuff of him. I paid all kinds of prices, from 10 cents up. I usually paid 10 cents a drink. When I bought it by the bottle I paid from 25 cents to $ 1, owing to the size I bought. When I got this liquor I called for booze. I drank with Bob Ankrom at the time he would not pay the assessment. We drank red-eye booze, and I paid for it. We drank it out of a small like glass, I think it was a wine glass, as well as I remember.
It appears, without dispute, that the defendant was engaged in the business of selling hardware, groceries and drugs in the village of Barada, in Richardson county, Nebraska,...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Nixon v. State
...92 Neb. 115138 N.W. 136NIXONv.STATE.No. 17,546.Supreme Court of Nebraska.Oct. 18, Syllabus by the Court. In a prosecution for the sale of spirituous and intoxicating liquor called whisky, in violation of chapter 50, Comp. St. 1911, evidence that the liquor sold, without a license, to the pr......