Peters v. Com.

Decision Date18 September 1913
Citation154 Ky. 689,159 S.W. 531
PartiesPETERS v. COMMONWEALTH.
CourtKentucky Court of Appeals

Appeal from Circuit Court, Madison County.

Mike Peters was convicted of the crime of having whisky in his possession in local option territory for the purpose of selling the same, and he appeals. Affirmed.

John C Chenault and D. M. Chenault, both of Richmond, for appellant.

James Garnett, Atty. Gen., and O. S. Hogan, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the Commonwealth.

CLAY C.

Appellant Mike Peters, was arrested on a warrant issued by the police judge of Richmond charging him with having in his possession in Richmond, Ky. local option territory, whisky for the purpose of selling same. On the trial in the police court the jury found him guilty and fixed his punishment at a fine of $50 and ten days in jail. From that judgment he appealed to the Madison circuit court. The jury there found him guilty and fixed his punishment at a fine of $100 and 50 days in jail. From the judgment entered on the verdict, this appeal is prosecuted.

The evidence heard at the trial is, in substance, as follows:

J. H Allman, an officer of the city of Richmond, testified that he had received information that Amos Woolrey had gotten off the train at Red House with some whisky. He and two of his deputies went out the Red House pike to the railroad crossing, a point within the city limits of Richmond. In a short time Peters and Woolrey came along in a buggy. He stopped them and asked if they had any whisky. Peters said they had none, but when they went to search the buggy Peters admitted they had whisky.

J. D. Dykes testified that he was with Allman when the arrest was made. He heard Peters say he had no whisky, and heard Woolrey say, "Yes, we have whisky."

It was admitted that Richmond was local option territory.

Appellant, Peters, testified that on the 8th or 9th of May he heard Amos Woolrey say he was going to Winchester. Told him he wanted him to bring four quarts of Old Elk. He said he would not bring it to Richmond, but that if witness would meet him at Red House he would. Witness gave him the money and went down to Red House where Woolrey gave him the four quarts. Witness got it for his own use and did not intend to sell it. Told Allman and Dykes he did not have any whisky for them. He hired a horse and buggy and drove six miles to meet Woolrey and get the four quarts of whisky.

Amos Woolrey testified that on May court day last he saw his brother-in-law, who resided on Red Lick in Madison county. They agreed that he should go to his brother-in-law's home for the purpose of going fishing. His brother-in-law asked him to bring something to drink, and he promised him to do so. His brother-in-law wanted a gallon for himself. Witness arranged to go to Winchester and mentioned the fact in the business house of Peters. Peters asked him to bring four quarts of Old Elk. Told Peters he would not bring any whisky to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
30 cases
  • Hudson v. Com.
    • United States
    • Kentucky Court of Appeals
    • May 7, 1926
    ... ... for violating a criminal law of the state may be had upon ... circumstantial evidence alone when it is of such force as ... to reasonably exclude every hypothesis of the ... defendant's innocence. King v. Commonwealth ... [136 S.W. 147] 143 Ky. 127; Peters v. Commonwealth ... [159 S.W. 531] 154 Ky. 689; Mobley v. Commonwealth ... [227 S.W. 584] 190 Ky. 421 [424]. This is especially true ... of violations of the liquor laws, which are nearly always ... committed with secrecy and by methods that often make ... ...
  • Hudson and Walker v. Commonwealth
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
    • May 7, 1926
    ...it is of such force as to reasonably exclude every hypothesis of the defendant's innocence. King v. Commonwealth, 143 Ky. 127; Peters v. Commonwealth, 154 Ky. 689; Mobley v. Commonwealth, 190 Ky. 421. This is especially true of violations of the laws, which are nearly always committed with ......
  • Dority v. Commonwealth
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
    • June 11, 1937
    ...S.W. 499; King v. Commonwealth, 143 Ky. [125] 127, 136 S.W. 147; Wendling v. Commonwealth, 143 Ky. 587, 137 S.W. 205; Peters v. Commonwealth, 154 Ky. 689, 159 S.W. 531; Mobley v. Commonwealth, 190 Ky. 424, 227 S.W. 584; Bowling v. Commonwealth, 193 Ky. [642] 647, 237 S.W. "When the circumst......
  • Brent v. Commonwealth
    • United States
    • Kentucky Court of Appeals
    • April 21, 1922
    ...reasonable doubt. Gordon v. Commonwealth, 136 Ky. 508, 124 S.W. 806; Commonwealth v. Little, 140 Ky. 550, 131 S.W. 387; Peters v. Commonwealth, 154 Ky. 689, 159 S.W. 531; King v. Commonwealth, 143 Ky. 125, 136 S.W. Mobley v. Commonwealth, 190 Ky. 424, 227 S.W. 584. The instructions are comp......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT