State v. Gallagher
| Decision Date | 13 February 1900 |
| Citation | 45 A. 430,72 Conn. 604 |
| Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE v. GALLAGHER. |
Appeal from district court of Waterbury; George H. Cowell, Judge.
Prosecution of John P. Gallagher for selling milk without a license. From a judgment sustaining a demurrer to the information, the state appeals. Affirmed.
This was a prosecution brought against the defendant upon an ordinance of the city of Waterbury. The complaint was in Ave counts. The first one alleged "that on the 20th day of March, 1899, at said city and town of Waterbury, within said district, John F. Gallagher, now of said Waterbury, with force and arms, did then and there unlawfully offer and expose for sale certain milk, without first having obtained from the board of health of said city of Waterbury a license so to do, against the peace, of evil example, and contrary to the ordinance of said city of Waterbury in such case made and provided." All the other counts were, as to their formal parts, precisely like this one. The material words in the second count were, "did then and there unlawfully sell certain milk"; in the third count, "did then and there unlawfully have in his possession, with intent to sell, certain milk"; the fourth count, "did then and there unlawfully deliver for sale certain milk"; and the fifth, "did then and there unlawfully deliver for consumption certain milk." The defendant demurred to this complaint upon the ground, generally, that the ordinance of the city of Waterbury upon which the prosecution was brought was not authorized by the charter of the city, nor by the laws of the state. The court sustained the demurrer, and the state has appealed. The ordinance of the city of Waterbury referred to in the case is one apparently intended to prevent the sale of "unclean, impure, unwholesome, unhealthy or adulterated milk." Its first section forbids the sale of such milk. The second section defines what is meant by the term "adulterated milk," as used in the ordinance. The third requires licenses for milk sellers. The fourth and fifth sections are as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Hughes
...them if the informations were insufficient for any cause, though such cause was not mentioned in the specifications. See State v. Gallagher, 72 Conn. 604, 606, 45 A. 430; State v. McKee, 73 Conn. 18, 24, 46 A. 409, 49 L.R.A. 542; State v. Pape, 90 Conn. 98, 100, 96 A. 313; State v. Murphy, ......
-
State v. Figueroa
...Horton v. Meskill, 187 Conn. 187, 191-99, 445 A.2d 579 (1982); these sections do not apply to criminal cases. See State v. Gallagher, 72 Conn. 604, 606, 45 A. 430 (1900). Criminal procedure in Connecticut is governed by a separate and distinct set of carefully drawn rules. See Practice Book......