State v. Martin
Decision Date | 02 February 1892 |
Parties | STATE v. MARTIN. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Nat. C. Dryden, for appellant. John M. Wood, Atty. Gen., and O. H. Avery, Pros. Atty., for the State.
An information was presented by the prosecuting attorney in the circuit court of Lincoln county, charging defendant with a violation of the statute in relation to druggists and pharmacists by selling intoxicating liquors without license, and without proper prescriptions. The case was sent by change of venue to the Hannibal court of common pleas for trial. Defendant filed a motion to quash the information on the ground, among others, that it failed to set out the name of the vendee of the liquor, which was overruled. The information contained three counts. The state entered a nolle prosequi as to the third count; and on a trial before the court without a jury the court acquitted defendant on the first count, but found him guilty as charged in the second count, and assessed his punishment at a fine of $100. The case was appealed to the St. Louis court of appeals; and how it reached this court will fully appear by the opinion of that court, delivered by Judge BIGGS, who, speaking of the failure of the information to give the name of the person to whom the alleged illegal sale of liquor was made, says: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Clark v. Atchison & Eastern Bridge Co.
... ... Spiro v. Transit ... Co., 76 S.W. 689; Whitsett v. Ransom, 79 S.W ... 260; Spohn v. Railroad, 87 S.W. 84; State v ... Prim, 11 S.W. 732; Haynes v. Trenton, 18 S.W ... 1005; Burdict v. Ry. Co., 27 S.W. 453; Vaughn v ... Ry., 18 S.W.2d 66; Jones v ... ...
-
Clark v. Atchison & Eastern Bridge Co.
... ... Spiro v. Transit Co., 76 S.W. 689; Whitsett v. Ransom, 79 S.W. 260; Spohn v. Railroad, 87 S.W. 84; State v. Prim, 11 S.W. 732; Haynes v. Trenton, 18 S.W. 1005; Burdict v. Ry. Co., 27 S.W. 453; Vaughn v. Ry., 18 S.W. (2d) 66; Jones v. Railroad, 228 S.W ... ...
-
State v. Miner
...have described what were the mechanical and other means employed . . . and stated with whom the bets, etc., were made." In State v. Martin, 108 Mo. 117, 18 S.W. 1005, distinction is pointed out between a case charging one with selling liquor without a license, in which case it is not necess......
-
Rice, Stix & Co. v. Sally
...of by appellants is very forcibly and appropriately expressed by Gantt, J., in Haynes v. Town of Trenton, 108 Mo., loc. cit. 133, 18 S. W. 1005. He said: "The disposition of this court is to permit the greatest latitude in the argument of a cause to a jury. But its disposition to trust larg......