Bryant v. State

36 S.W. 188, 62 Ark. 459, 1896 Ark. LEXIS 201
Supreme Court of Arkansas·Decided June 6, 1896·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinion

Battle, J.

The evidence adduced in the trial of the appellant in the circuit court failed to show that he sold and gave away, and caused to be sold and given away, and kept for sale and to be given away, and allowed to be kept for sale and to be given away, in the Baird Saloon building, in the town of Paragould, in the county of Greene and State of Arkansas, ardent, vinous, malt, fermented, and intoxicating liquors, and thereby failed to prove that he was guilty of the offense charged against him. Having alleged that the liquors were sold and given away, and were kept for sale and to be given away, in the Baird Saloon building, it devolved upon the state to prove it in order to convict. Proof of sale and gift, and keeping for sale and gift, in any other place would not be sufficient. Shover v. State, 10 Ark. 259; State v. Anderson, 30 Ark. 131.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Bryant v. State, 36 S.W. 188, 62 Ark. 459, 1896 Ark. LEXIS 201 (Ark. 1896).

36 S.W. 188 (Bryant v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Starks v. Browning
20 S.W.3d 645 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1999)
Butler v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.
313 S.W.2d 260 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1958)
Hill v. State
47 S.W.2d 31 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1932)
Winfrey v. State
202 S.W. 23 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1918)
Carleton v. State
196 S.W. 124 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1917)
Lee v. State
169 S.W. 963 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1914)
Keoun v. State
41 S.W. 808 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1897)
Adams v. State
41 S.W. 423 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1897)
Jenks v. State
39 S.W. 361 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1896)