Simpson v. State
This text of 165 N.E. 557 (Simpson v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Appellant was charged by affidavit with violation of §4 of the act of March 4, 1925 (Acts 1925 p. 144, §2717 Burns 1926), which makes it unlawful to sell intoxicating liquors to be used as a beverage. Trial resulted in a conviction.
The evidence, without conflict, shows that appellant, the owner and operator of a restaurant and soft drink place, and, at the time in question, sold Jamaica ginger which was from sixty to eighty per cent alcohol per volryue, the sale being made with knowledge that the same was purchased for beverage purposes.
It is contended by appellant that the decision of the court is not sustained by sufficient evidence and is contrary to law for the reason that the charge is for the sale of intoxicating liquor, and that the liquid sold was Jamaica ginger. The contention is without merit.
This court will take judicial notice that Jamaica ginger which is from sixty to eighty per cent alcohol per volume is intoxicating. McLean v. People (1919), 66 Colo. 486, 180 Pac. 676; People v. Philpott (1922), 219 Mich. 156, 188 N. W. 497. See, also, Abel v. State (1928), 200 Ind. 283, 163 N. E. 91.
This case is readily distinguished from Hedges v. State (1923), 194 Ind. 122, 142 N. E. 13, cited and relied on by appellant. In that case there was no evidence that the Jamaica ginger was sold for beverage purposes.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
165 N.E. 557, 89 Ind. App. 25, 1929 Ind. App. LEXIS 78, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simpson-v-state-indctapp-1929.