Gaskins v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Gaskins v. State

55 S.E. 1045, 127 Ga. 51, 1906 Ga. LEXIS 730

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedDecember 12, 1906

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 55 S.E. 1045 (Gaskins v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gaskins v. State, 55 S.E. 1045, 127 Ga. 51, 1906 Ga. LEXIS 730 (Ga. 1906).

Pincite

Opinion

Beck, J.

1. When a defendant is on trial charged with illegally selling intoxicating liquor, and the evidence shows that he received money from another person, accompanied with a request to procure for the latter some intoxicating drink, and shortly thereafter returned and delivered the article as requested, the burden is on the accused to explain how, where, and from whom he obtained the liquor; and until some other person filling the character of seller in the transaction is shown to the satisfaction of the jury, they would be authorized to treat the defense that the accused acted as the agent of the buyer as a mere subterfuge to cover up an illegal sale by himself, and to find him guilty of selling the liquor. White v. State, 93 Ga. 47; Mack v. State, 116 Ga. 546.

2. The evidence as to whether or not the liquor sold was in fact intoxicating was sufficient to authorize the jury to find that it was; and the judge being satisfied with the verdict, it should be allowed to stand.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Beck, J.

1. When a defendant is on trial charged with illegally selling intoxicating liquor, and the evidence shows that he received money from another person, accompanied with a request to procure for the latter some intoxicating drink, and shortly thereafter returned and delivered the article as requested, the burden is on the accused to explain how, where, and from whom he obtained the liquor; and until some other person filling the character of seller in the transaction is shown to the satisfaction of the jury, they would be authorized to treat the defense that the accused acted as the agent of the buyer as a mere subterfuge to cover up an illegal sale by himself, and to find him guilty of selling the liquor. White v. State, 93 Ga. 47; Mack v. State, 116 Ga. 546.

2. The evidence as to whether or not the liquor sold was in fact intoxicating was sufficient to authorize the jury to find that it was; and the judge being satisfied with the verdict, it should be allowed to stand.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

55 S.E. 1045, 127 Ga. 51, 1906 Ga. LEXIS 730, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gaskins-v-state-ga-1906.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack