Brazeale v. State

97 So. 525, 133 Miss. 171, 1923 Miss. LEXIS 119
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 8, 1923
DocketNo. 23630
StatusPublished
Cited by19 cases

This text of 97 So. 525 (Brazeale v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Brazeale v. State, 97 So. 525, 133 Miss. 171, 1923 Miss. LEXIS 119 (Mich. 1923).

Opinion

Smith, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is an appeal from a conviction for having intoxicating liquor in possession. When arrested, the appellant was in the act of taking a drink of whisky from a bottle. According to his version of the matter, the liquor Avas the property of another, Avho had just handed it to him, so that he might take a drink thereof.

The court charged the jury, at the request of the state, to find the defendant guilty if they believed from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that he — “did Avillfully and unlawfully take into his hands and thereby have in his possession a bottle containing intoxicating liquor, commonly called ‘white lightning whisky,’ for the purpose of taking a drink thereof.”

The question raised by this instruction, in the last analysis, is simply this: Is it a crime to take a drink of intoxicating liquor? The statute does not so provide, as could have been very easily done, had the'legislature so desired; its language being:

“It shall be unlawful for any person ... to have, control or possess” intoxicating liquor. Section -2, chapter 189, Laws 1918.

The possession contemplated by the statute is of more substantial character than that which is for the purpose of and to the extent only that is necessary for taking a [174]*174drink. Harness v. State, 130 Miss. 673, 95 So. 64; Anderson v. State (Miss.), 96 So. 163. The appellant was entitled to, but seems not to have requested, an instruction charging the jury to acquit him.

Reversed and remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. Hogue
486 P.2d 403 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1971)
Eckroth v. State
227 So. 2d 313 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1969)
Bailey v. State ex rel. Yancy
179 So. 2d 559 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1965)
Hutson v. Hutson
123 So. 2d 550 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1960)
Smith v. State
24 So. 2d 85 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1945)
Garland v. State
146 So. 637 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1933)
Commonwealth v. Benson Et Ux.
160 A. 243 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1932)
Wylie v. State
119 So. 825 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1929)
Adair v. State
114 So. 345 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1927)
Speybroeck v. State
155 N.E. 817 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1927)
Ricks v. State
111 So. 752 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1927)
Reynolds v. State
111 So. 285 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1926)
Colbaugh v. United States
15 F.2d 929 (Eighth Circuit, 1926)
Medlin v. State
108 So. 177 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1926)
Medlen v. State
108 So. 177 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1926)
State v. Williams
243 P. 563 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1925)
People v. Ninehouse
198 N.W. 973 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1924)
Harbin v. State
99 So. 740 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
97 So. 525, 133 Miss. 171, 1923 Miss. LEXIS 119, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brazeale-v-state-miss-1923.