State v. Gussey

214 N.W. 652, 171 Minn. 520, 1927 Minn. LEXIS 1643
Supreme Court of Minnesota·Decided May 27, 1927·No. No. 26,081.·Published

Opinion

PEE CUEIAM.

Defendant was convicted of the crime of unlawfully selling intoxicating liquor potable as a beverage and appeals from an order denying a new trial.

Defendant cites State v. Umlauf, 169 Minn. 422, 211 N. W. 475, holding that the prosecution must prove that the liquor was potable as a beverage, and claims that the prosecution failed to prove that fact in the present case. This is the only point urged against the conviction. Three witnesses who drank or tasted the liquor in question testified that it was moonshine whisky. This was sufficient to justify the jury in finding that it was potable as a beverage. State v. Brown, 151 Minn. 340, 186 N. W. 946; State v. Tremont, 160 Minn. 314, 200 N. W. 93; State v. Ruddy, 160 Minn. 435, 200 N. W. 631.

Order affirmed.

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

State v. Gussey, 214 N.W. 652, 171 Minn. 520, 1927 Minn. LEXIS 1643 (Mich. 1927).

214 N.W. 652 (State v. Gussey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Umlauf
211 N.W. 475 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1926)
State v. Brown
186 N.W. 946 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1922)
State v. Tremont
200 N.W. 93 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1924)
State v. Ruddy
200 N.W. 631 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1924)