State v. McCafferty

63 Me. 223
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedJuly 1, 1874
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 63 Me. 223 (State v. McCafferty) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. McCafferty, 63 Me. 223 (Me. 1874).

Opinion

Dickerson, J.

The first requested instruction assumes that hop beer is not intoxicating, a fact to be found by the jury. The points raised in the second and third requested instructions are not open to the respondent, since the case shows that “the officer served the warrant and made return thereon of the seizure, and arrested the defendant.”

The leave granted to the jury by the court to take to their room a bottle of the liquor introduced in evidence, notasthe liquor seized, but as liquor manufactured and sold by the same person under the same name as the liquor seized, was unobjectionable, coupled with the instruction to the jury not to consider the qualities of such liquor unless they should find from the evidence in the case, that it was the same kind as that seized.

Exceptions overruled.

Appleton O. J., Walton, Barrows, Virgin and Peters, JJ., concurred.

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

Related

Nix v. City of Andalusia
109 So. 182 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1926)
State v. Elmers
198 Iowa 1041 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1924)
Hopkins v. State
1913 OK CR 81 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1913)
State v. Baker
122 P. 335 (Washington Supreme Court, 1912)
State v. Riley
126 P. 294 (Utah Supreme Court, 1911)
Daniel v. State
43 So. 22 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1907)
State v. Allen
57 P. 725 (Montana Supreme Court, 1899)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
63 Me. 223, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-mccafferty-me-1874.