State v. Lashus

• Decision Date: 12 December 1887
• Citation: 11 A. 604,79 Me. 541
• Parties: STATE v. LASHUS.
• Court: Maine Supreme Court

11 A. 604

79 Me. 541

STATE

v. LASHUS.¹

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

December 12, 1887.

On exceptions by respondent from superior court, Kennebec county.

Indictment for the illegal transportation of intoxicating liquors in violation of Rev. St. c. 27, § 31, which is as follows: "No person shall knowingly bring into the state, or knowingly transport from place to place in the state, any intoxicating liquors, with intent to sell the same in the state in violation of law, or with intent that the same shall be so sold by any person, or to aid any person in such sale, under a penalty of fifty dollars for each offense." The respondent demurred to the indictment, and, his demurrer being overruled by the presiding judge, alleged exceptions.

L. T. Carleton, Co. Atty., for the State. F. A. Waldron, for respondent.

VIRGIN, J. The complaint follows the language of the statutory provision (Rev. St. c. 27, § 31) which creates the offense intended to be charged; but such a mode of setting out a violation of a penal or criminal statute is not necessarily sufficient. State v. Railroad Co., 76 Me. 411; Com. v. Pray, 13 Pick. 359. The law affords to the respondent in a criminal prosecution such a reasonably particular statement of all the essential elements which constitute the intended offense as shall apprise him of the criminal act charged; and to the end, also, that if he again be prosecuted for the same offense, he may plead the former conviction or acquittal in bar.

Recurring to the complaint, we find no allegation designating from what place, or to what place, "in the state of Maine," the liquors were transported. The complaint is too indefinite to afford to the defendant the requisite information to which the law entitles him, or to identify it in case another and subsequent prosecution for the same offense should be instituted. The case of Com. v. Reily, 9 Gray, 1, based on a similar statute, is in point, and holds, on a motion in arrest of judgment, that a complaint like the one at bar is insufficient. Had the allegations limited the places to and from which the liquors were transported to a particular town or city, the complaint might have been sufficient. Com. v. Hutchinson, 6 Allen, 595. Exceptions sustained. Complaint adjudged bad.

PETERS, C. J., DANFORTH, WALTON, EMERY, and FOSTER, JJ., concurred.

1 Reported by Leslie C. Cornish, Esq., of the Augusta bar.