Wilson v. State

• Decision Date: 22 May 1915
• Docket Number: A-2259.
• Citation: Wilson v. State, 148 P. 823, 11 Okla.Crim. 510, 1915 OK CR 47 (Okla. Crim. App. 1915)
• Parties: WILSON v. STATE.
• Court: United States State Court of Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

148 P. 823

11 Okla.Crim. 510, 1915 OK CR 47

WILSON v. STATE.

No. A-2259.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma

May 22, 1915

Syllabus by the Court.

Under section 6, c. 26, Session Laws of 1913, providing that "The keeping in excess of one quart of any spirituous vinous, fermented or malt liquors, or any imitation thereof or substitute therefor; or any liquors or compounds of any kind or description whatsoever, whether medicated or not which contain as much as one-half of one per centum of alcohol, measured by volume, and which is capable of being used as a beverage, except preparations compounded by any licensed pharmacist, the sale of which would not subject him to the payment of the special tax required by the laws of the United States, or in any manner permitting any other person to have or keep any such liquors in or about his place of business, or any place of amusement, or recreation, or any public resort, or any clubroom * * * shall be prima facie evidence of an intention to convey, sell, or otherwise dispose of such liquors"--it is error to instruct the jury that, "By prima facie evidence, is meant such evidence as, in the absence of any other evidence to the contrary, is sufficient to establish and prove any fact or thing beyond a reasonable doubt," since the statute only means to make such evidence competent to prove the unlawful intent, and sufficient to justify the jury in finding a defendant guilty, provided it satisfies them beyond a reasonable doubt, but not otherwise.

The phrase "prima facie evidence," as used in the statute, is such evidence as, in the judgment of the law, is sufficient to establish the fact, if it be credited by the jury, and, unless rebutted or the contrary proved, remains sufficient for that purpose. Whether or not such evidence is sufficient to overcome the presumption of innocence of a defendant, and to establish his guilt beyound a reasonable doubt, when all the evidence including the presumptions is considered, is for the determination of the jury.

Appeal from County Court, Jackson County; J. M. Williams, Judge.

M. W. Wilson was convicted of violating the prohibitory law, and appeals. Reversed.

W. T. McConnell, of Altus, for plaintiff in error.

R. McMillan, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

DOYLE P.J.

On information filed in the county court of Jackson county, charging that on or about the 26th day of September, 1913, he did unlawfully have in his possession certain intoxicating liquor, to wit, whisky and beer, with the intent to sell, barter, give away, and otherwise furnish the same, M. W. Wilson, the plaintiff in error, was convicted, and in pursuance of the verdict signed by five jurors he was, on the 7th day of March, 1914, sentenced to be confined in the county jail for 30 days and to pay a fine of $50. From this judgment he appeals.

It appears from the evidence that plaintiff in error was a part owner of the Wilson and Heatley Garage in Altus; that the sheriff and his deputies on a search warrant searched the place for liquor, and found three or four quarts of whisky and about a dozen bottles of beer, some in a closet and some in a bedroom occupied by the defendant, Wilson.

The court with other instructions, instructed as follows:

"(6) You are further instructed that the having possession or keeping of more than one quart of whisky in or about one's place of business constitutes and is prima facie evidence of such person's intention to sell or otherwise unlawfully dispose of such whisky. By place of business is meant the place where one's business vocation is carried on or conducted. By prima facie evidence is meant such evidence as, in the absence of any other evidence to the contrary, is sufficient to establish and prove any fact or thing beyond a reasonable doubt."

Indorsed:

"Defendant excepts to the sixth paragraph of the court's instructions, and an exception is allowed.

J. M. Williams, Judge."

That part of the foregoing instruction in which the court defined the legal effect of the term "prima facie evidence" is assigned as error. The instruction attempts to give effect to that part of section 6, c. 26, Session Laws 1913, which provides that "The keeping in excess of one quart of any spirituous, vinous, fermented or malt liquors, or any imitation thereof, or substitute therefor; or any liquors or compounds of any kind or description whatsoever, whether...