Darsey v. State

124 S.W.2d 380, 136 Tex. Crim. 165, 1939 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 64
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided February 1, 1939·No. No. 20151.·Published

Opinion

*166 Graves, Judge.

The appellant was charged with a violation of the liquor laws of this State in that as a pharmacist licensed to sell whisky for medicinal purposes under a doctor’s prescription, he had sold whisky to one Woodrow McDermitt, without a prescription therefor being issued by a regularly licensed physician, and upon a trial therefor he was fined the sum of $100.00.

The complaint and information fail to allege that such sale was made “for medicinal purposes.” We have heretofore held in Wilson v. State, 102 S. W. (2d) 1057, that such an averment was essential. To the same effect is the case of Gunn v. State, 109 S. W. (2d) 1056; also Taylor v. State, 110 S. W. (2d) 582, also Smith v. State, 115 S. W. (2d) 668.

This matter was called to the trial court’s attention in a motion in arrest of judgment.

The complaint and information are both defective in that they fail to allege that such whisky was sold “for medicinal purposes” without a proper prescription.

The judgment is reversed and the prosecution ordered dismissed.

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

Darsey v. State, 124 S.W.2d 380, 136 Tex. Crim. 165, 1939 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 64 (Tex. 1939).

124 S.W.2d 380 (Darsey v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Smith v. State
115 S.W.2d 668 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1938)
Gunn v. State
109 S.W.2d 1056 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1937)
Taylor v. State
110 S.W.2d 582 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1937)
Wilson v. State
102 S.W.2d 1057 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1937)