State v. Meyers

• Decision Date: 07 October 1925
• Docket Number: 210.
• Citation: 129 S.E. 600,190 N.C. 239
• Parties: STATE v. MEYERS.
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

129 S.E. 600

190 N.C. 239

STATE v. MEYERS.

No. 210.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

October 7, 1925

Appeal from Superior Court, Sampson County; Lyon, Judge.

C. A Meyers was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and appeals. New trial.

Evidence of possession and transportation held sufficient for jury.

Indictment for violation of prohibition law, and, from a judgment pronounced upon a verdict of guilty, the defendant appeals. New trial.

The defendant was charged with possessing, transporting exporting, importing, purchasing, and receiving intoxicating liquors, in violation of the Turlington Act, which is chapter 1, Public Laws 1923.

The state's evidence tended to show that two officers Honeycutt and Tew, searched the defendant's premises for intoxicating liquors three times. The first search on Sunday in August, 1923, resulted in finding nothing. On a Monday in September they searched again the premises and found no whisky this time, but did find an impression on the ground in 15 steps, and in the rear, of the defendant's barn. This impression was like that of a jug. The defendant was not then at home. The third search was in November; the defendant was present, and they found no evidence of liquor in his dwelling or outbuildings, but did find a track leading from the barn which was on the other side of the public road from the dwelling, and this track went from the barn down to his hog lot in a mulberry orchard, down beside the public road, in a corner of his field near to Mrs. Denning's field. This track from the barn down beside the hog lot led on to Mrs Denning's line fence; there a woman's track was coming toward the public road, joining the other tracks, and these tracks went down beside the line fence on defendant's side of the line fence to a ditch in defendant's field. This ditch was some 75 yards from the hog lot and about 100 yards from the public road. The tracks thence led down the ditch about 20 yards from the line fence; and these officers, following the tracks, found there a 3-gallon jug in the ditch, about 2 gallons of whisky in the jug. The ditch and the jug were about 150 yards from defendant's dwelling on the lands that he had rented from one Tart for that year. The officers did not find any tracks from the jug in the ditch to defendant's house or barn. Further down the same ditch they found a 5-gallon jug in an old fertilizer sack near the end of the bridge over the ditch. This jug had only the odor of whisky in it.

One Blackman testified that, on the day in September when the officers searched defendant's premises, he visited the premises and found a 3-gallon jug, about half full of whisky, in the pea vines about 15 steps just back of defendant's barn, and there were tracks leading to and from the jug towards the barn. This jug was where the impression on the ground was discovered by the two officers. There was evidence tending to show defendant's bad character.

The defendant's evidence tended to show, as testified by defendant himself, that he was a tenant farmer, 35 years old, rented the farm from Tart in 1924, and that he did not drink or sell whisky, and did not have any; that the officers came to his home in August and wanted to search his premises, and he told them to search all they wanted to; that they searched his buildings and found no whisky; that in September when they came back they searched his buildings again and found nothing, except the print in his cornfield of a bucket where his wife was gathering roasting ears; that in November, when the officers came and wanted to search, he told them to proceed, and that they opened up his buildings and found nothing; that Mr. Honeycutt went from his barn down to the mulberry orchard, where the defendant had formerly come to and from feeding his hogs. The mulberry orchard is about 200 yards down the public road at the corner of the field next to the road and Mrs. Denning's fence; that the officer then went about 45 yards down the fence to a ditch and came back with a 2-gallon jug half full of corn whisky, which he said he found in the ditch about 12 feet from Mrs. Denning's fence. Defendant said he knew nothing about the whisky and had not been at that ditch or in the field near to the ditch since May, when he cut oats; the field was not cultivated after the oats were cut; that he saw the tracks from the public road leading to and from the jug, but they were not his tracks, they were larger. These tracks led from the public road near Mr. Jones' residence, 205 yards down the road from his home. These tracks came down beside the fence on the Denning side and got over the fence into the field at the ditch where the jug was. Several other people saw these tracks. There were no tracks across the oat patch leading up to the house. There was a marriage at his house on Saturday night before the liquor was found Monday morning. His brother-in-law, who lived with him, got married. There was a crowd there Saturday night late, and some were drinking, and he made two men leave. He did not know where they got their liquor, did not see any or drink any. There was an orchard on this place, and his wife had some fruit jars in the house in which to can the fruit; they were new jars, and never had any whisky in them. His wife was unable to attend the trial.

R....