Darsey v. State
This text of 124 S.W.2d 380 (Darsey v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
124 S.W.2d 380, 136 Tex. Crim. 165, 1939 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 64, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/darsey-v-state-texcrimapp-1939.