State v. Wyman
| Decision Date | 28 January 1888 |
| Citation | 13 A. 47,80 Me. 117 |
| Parties | STATE v. WYMAN. |
| Court | Maine Supreme Court |
On exceptions from supreme judicial court, Waldo county.
Indictment for a single sale of intoxicating liquors under Rev. St. Me. c. 27, §§ 33, 34.
Orville D. Baker, Atty. Gen., and R. F. Dunton, Co. Atty., for the State. Wm. H. Fogler, for respondent.
The indictment charges a single sale of intoxicating liquor in apt terms contra formam statuti, and further avers that at a particular term of court the defendant was convicted "of selling a quantity of intoxicating liquor." Rev. St. c. 27, § 33, prohibits the sale of intoxicating liquor. Section 34, section 2, act 1885, c. 366, provides that whoever sells any intoxicating liquor in violation of this chapter, forfeits, etc., and on every subsequent conviction shall be punished by fine and imprisonment. The indictment charges a prior conviction of the same unlawful act charged in it; and is sufficient under Rev. St. c. 27, § 57. A record of conviction no more specific than this indictment was held sufficient in State v. Lashus, 79 Me. 504, 11 Atl. Rep. 180. Exceptions overruled.
1 Reported by Leslie C. Cornish, Esq., of the Augusta bar.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Stewart
...S.E. 498; Mayabb v. State, 255 S.W. 189; Tucker v. State, 251 S.W. 1090; Gavalis v. State, 135 N.E. 147; Massey v. U.S. 281 F. 293; State v. Wyman, 13 A. 47; 23 Cyc. 228, Booth v. U.S. 197 F. 283; Black on Int. Liq., sec. 467; Commonwealth v. Conant, 72 Mass. 482; Commonwealth v. Ryan, 75 M......
-
State v. Stewart
...94 Tex. Cr. R. 505, 251 S. W. 1090; Gavalis v. State, 192 Ind. 42, 135 N. E. 147; Massey v. U. S. (C. C. A.) 281 F. 293; State v. Wyman, 80 Me. 117, 13 A. 47; 23 Cyc. 228, 232; Booth v. U. S., 197 F. 283, 116 C. C. A. 645; Black on Int. Liq. § 467; Commonwealth v. Conant, 6 Gray (72 Mass.) ......
-
State v. McClay
...65 Me. 234; State v. Gorham, 65 Me. 270; State v. Dolan & Hurley, 69 Me. 573; State v. Lashus, 79 Me. 504, 11 A. 180; State v. Wyman, 80 Me. 117, 13 A. 47; State v. Dorr, 82 Me. 341, 19 A. 861; State v. Simpson, 91 Me. 77, 39 A. 286; State v. Bartley, 92 Me. 422, 43 A. 19, and State v. Hatc......
-
State v. Dorr
...liquor. Proof of sale of any intoxicating liquor proves the offense. The state need not allege more than it need prove. State v. Wyman, 80 Me. 117, 118, 13 Atl. Rep. 3. That, in alleging a prior conviction of a similar offense, the time of such prior conviction is stated to be in the year 1......