Brehm v. State

Nebraska Supreme Court

Brehm v. State

197 N.W. 404, 111 Neb. 659, 1924 Neb. LEXIS 36

CourtNebraska Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 13, 1924

DocketNo. 23463

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 197 N.W. 404 (Brehm v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brehm v. State, 197 N.W. 404, 111 Neb. 659, 1924 Neb. LEXIS 36 (Neb. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

Good, J.

Alexander G. Brehm, plaintiff in error (hereinafter referred to as defendant), was prosecuted upon a complaint, which charged him with possession of intoxicating liquors, contrary to the provision of an ordinance of the city of Hastings. The jury returned a verdict of guilty and the court imposed a fine of $100 and costs. Defendant brings the case to this court for a review of the record of his conviction. Numerous errors are assigned, but it will be necessary to consider but one, namely, that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict.

The record discloses that the liquors had been in defendant’s possession in his residence since a date prior to the enactment of our prohibitory law; that he had not sold nor given away any of such liquors, and that no person, save himself and members of his immediate family, had used any thereof; that such liquors as he had in his possession were [660]*660used by him and members of his immediate family upon their table and were kept for the personal use of the defendant, and that the quantity was not more than was reasonably sufficient for his personal use and needs. This evi-. dence is uncontradicted and is sufficient to overcome the presumption that the possession was unlawful.

The evidence is insufficient to support the verdict, and the judgment of the district court is reversed and the action dismissed.

Reversed and dismissed.

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

Good, J.

Alexander G. Brehm, plaintiff in error (hereinafter referred to as defendant), was prosecuted upon a complaint, which charged him with possession of intoxicating liquors, contrary to the provision of an ordinance of the city of Hastings. The jury returned a verdict of guilty and the court imposed a fine of $100 and costs. Defendant brings the case to this court for a review of the record of his conviction. Numerous errors are assigned, but it will be necessary to consider but one, namely, that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict.

The record discloses that the liquors had been in defendant’s possession in his residence since a date prior to the enactment of our prohibitory law; that he had not sold nor given away any of such liquors, and that no person, save himself and members of his immediate family, had used any thereof; that such liquors as he had in his possession were [660]*660used by him and members of his immediate family upon their table and were kept for the personal use of the defendant, and that the quantity was not more than was reasonably sufficient for his personal use and needs. This evi-. dence is uncontradicted and is sufficient to overcome the presumption that the possession was unlawful.

The evidence is insufficient to support the verdict, and the judgment of the district court is reversed and the action dismissed.

Reversed and dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

197 N.W. 404, 111 Neb. 659, 1924 Neb. LEXIS 36, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brehm-v-state-neb-1924.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack