State v. Simpson, 22572.

• Decision Date: 17 November 1931
• Docket Number: 22572.
• Citation: 5 P.2d 328,165 Wash. 258
• Court: Washington Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE v. SIMPSON.

5 P.2d 328

165 Wash. 258

STATE v. SIMPSON.

No. 22572.

Supreme Court of Washington

November 17, 1931

Department 2.

Appeal from Superior Court, Snohomish County; Guy C. Alston, Judge.

J. W Simpson was convicted of the unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

Gordon D. Eveland and A. E. Dailey, both of Everett, for appellant.

Charles R. Denney and C. W. Jordan, both of Everett, for the State.

BEALS J.

Defendant J. W. Simpson, and two others were charged with having possession of intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale defendant, Simpson, being also charged with a former conviction of the offense of possession of intoxicating liquor. During the course of the trial, the court granted a motion to dismiss as to the two persons jointly charged with defendant; a similar motion interposed on behalf of defendant by his counsel having been overruled. Defendant was found guilty of unlawful possession; the verdict including a special finding to the effect that defendant had previously been convicted of a similar offense. From a judgment entered upon the verdict and sentence imposed thereon, defendant appeals.

Appellant fails to include in his brief formal assignments of error, but it appears that he complains of certain rulings of the trial court made during the progress of the trial, and also of the refusal of the trial court to grant his motion for a dismissal based upon alleged insufficiency of the evidence.

Prior to his arrest, appellant was conducting a resort, known as Eagle Falls Tavern, on the Stevens Pass highway, a short distance east of Index. Appellant was purchasing this land on contract; there being situated thereon a building known as the Tavern, a shack in which appellant resided, and a few cabins standing at a distance back from the road. Appellant's nearest neighbor to the west resided at least a thousand feet away; the westerly boundary line of appellant's property being unmarked and the land being quite rough. On the morning of the arrest, two deputy sheriffs came to appellant's land with a warrant authorizing a search of the premises. Different small caches of intoxicating liquor were found near the house, trails leading from the house, to other caches where were found at one a quantity of beer, at another a considerable number of empty bottles. On the ground near the beer cache was found a spoon, which one of the deputy sheriffs testified was similar to other spoons found in appellant's house. The state attempted to introduce in evidence the spoon and the empty bottles, but, on appellant's objection, the offers were refused. The liquor found was, however, admitted in evidence, over appellant's protest. We find no merit in appellant's contention that the...