State v. Tissing
| Decision Date | 31 October 1881 |
| Citation | 74 Mo. 72 |
| Parties | THE STATE v. TISSING, Appellant. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Moniteau Circuit Court.--HON. G. W. MILLER, Judge.
REVERSED.
The indictment in this case was based upon section 1, page 342, of the statutes of 1877, and charged that defendant “on or about the 1st day of November, 1877, at, etc., being then and there a druggist and dealer in drugs and medicines, did unlawfully sell intoxicating liquor in less quantity than one gallon, to-wit: one pint of whisky * * without taking out a license as a dramshop keeper, the same not being then and there sold for medicinal or sacramental purposes.”
Moore & Williams for appellant.
D. H. McIntyre, Attorney General, for the State.
The indictment is well enough. It follows the language of the statute.
We reverse the judgment because it does not appear when the offense charged was committed. If the evidence had shown that the offense occurred within one year next before the finding of the indictment, this would have sufficed. The only testimony as to the time of selling was this: “I bought a pint of whisky of Tissing on the 4th of January, for medicine.” This evidence does not state when the violation of law took place, nor are any data given from which the time of the occurrence can reasonably be inferred. Such testimony will not answer. Judgment reversed and cause remanded.
All concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Knowles
...v. State, 4 Mo. 375; State v. McGinniss, 74 Mo. 246; State v. Schuerman, 70 Mo.App. 518; State v. Sauerburg, 64 Mo.App. 129; State v. Tissing, 74 Mo. 72; State v. Knolle, 90 Mo.App. 238. (c) It does appear that any demand was ever made by the Grand Lodge upon defendant. (d) It does not appe......
-
The State v. Wilson
... ... entirely different principles prevail. State v ... Madden, 81 Mo. 422; State v. Davis, 70 Mo. 467; ... State v. Roehm, 61 Mo. 82; State v. James, ... 63 Mo. 570; State v. Barr, 81 Mo. 118; State v ... Stogsdale, 67 Mo. 630; State v. Tissing, 74 Mo ... 72; State v. Anderson, 81 Mo. 78; State v ... McDaniel, 40 Mo.App. 356. (4) The appellant's ... contention as to the admissibility of the telegram and ... letters from the Boston parties, and defendant's alleged ... course of dealing with them, is entirely untenable. That ... ...
-
Acton v. Dooley
... ... Lynch does not state that anything said or done by, or the silence of Acton induced him either to build his fence, cellar wall or house, or after the wall was made, to ... ...
-
State v. Richmond
...of the law or the statute, relating to this offense. State v. Greenspan, 70 Mo.App. 468; State v. Sweeten, 75 Mo.App. 127; State v. Tissing, 74 Mo. 72. C. Crow, Attorney-General, and C. D. Corum for the State. (1) It is well-settled law in this State that when property is stolen and recentl......