State v. Sawyer

Decision Date07 January 1895
Citation31 A. 285,67 Vt. 239
PartiesSTATE v. SAWYER.
CourtVermont Supreme Court

Exceptions from Addison county court; Start, Judge.

Daniel Sawyer was convicted of keeping intoxicating liquor with intent to sell it in violation of law, and excepts. Affirmed.

In reference to the admission of testimony, the exceptions stated: "The state, in order to show whether the liquor and contents of the bottles so found were Intoxicating, improved as a witness said town liquor agent, who was asked the following question: 'Question. Did Mr. Cobb, the deputy sheriff, deliver to you, last December, some bottles and barrels of bottles?' Which question was seasonably objected to and admitted." The other question decided appears in the opinion.

F. L. Fish, State's Atty. J. M. Blade, for respondent.

THOMPSON, J. 1. No exception was taken to the admission of the question objected to by the respondent, and therefore the ruling of the county court cannot be passed upon by this court.

2. The Information charged the respondent with keeping and possessing intoxicating liquor with intent to sell and furnish the same in violation of law, and also alleged his prior conviction for selling and furnishing intoxicating liquor contrary to law. On trial, the record of such prior conviction was admitted in evidence to enhance the sentence, against the respondent's exception. The respondent was found guilty by the jury as of a second conviction, judgment rendered upon the verdict, and respondent sentenced to imprisonment in the house of correction for 90 days, and to pay a fine of $200 and costs of prosecution, with the alternative sentence, to which he excepted. The respondent contends that the conviction should be set aside because of the admission in evidence of the record of his prior conviction for selling and furnishing, and insists that only a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • E. L. Stoddard & Son v. Vill. of N. Troy
    • United States
    • Vermont Supreme Court
    • May 7, 1930
    ...enough. Newton v. Am. Car Sprinkler, Co., 88 Vt. 487, 494, 92 A. 831; Townshend v. Townshend, 84 Vt. 315, 317, 79 A. 388; State v. Sawyer, 67 Vt. 239, 240, 31 A. 285: Slayton, Trustee v. Drown, 93 Vt. 290, 296, 107 A. 307. But, if we assume the exception to be available, whatever error ther......
  • E. L. Stoddard & Son v. Village of North Troy
    • United States
    • Vermont Supreme Court
    • May 7, 1930
    ... ... Account---Partnership---Effect of Cessation of Business after ... Writ Issued---Assignments ...          1 ... Merely to state an objection, without taking an exception, is ... not enough to reserve question for review ...          2 ... Error, if any, in ... Newton v. Am. Car Sprinkler Co., 88 Vt ... 487, 494, 92 A. 831; Townshend v ... Townshend, 84 Vt. 315, 317, 79 A. 388; ... State v. Sawyer, 67 Vt. 239, 240, 31 A ... 285; Slayton, Trustee v. Drown, 93 Vt. 290, ... 296, 107 A. 307. But if we assume the exception to be ... available, ... ...
  • State v. Peace
    • United States
    • Louisiana Supreme Court
    • January 31, 1927
    ...have been interpreted by the courts of our sister states, and one of the leading cases on the question here raised is State v. Sawyer, 67 Vt. 239, 31 A. 285. that case the Supreme Court of Vermont said: "'If a person by himself, clerk, servant or agent, sells, furnishes or gives away, or ow......
  • State v. Cameron
    • United States
    • Vermont Supreme Court
    • February 7, 1967
    ...of the general form of charging the offense, and to prevent possible injustice in the administration of the law.' In State v. Sawyer, 67 Vt. 239, 31 A. 285, the information charged the respondent with a violation of the liquor statute and also alleged his prior conviction under the same sta......
  • 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