State v. . Rigsbee

189 S.E. 181, 211 N.C. 128, 1937 N.C. LEXIS 22

Opinion

Per Curiam.

At the trial of this action, the court instructed, the jury as follows:

“RTow, gentlemen of the jury, the court instructs you as a matter of law, that if you find from the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Mrs. M. M. Rigsbee had in her possession on the premises occupied by her husband, Mack Rigsbee, intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale, and that he knew that she had it there and permitted her to keep it there, then upon that finding it would be your duty to return a verdict that he is guilty of having intoxicating liquor in his possession for the purpose of sale.”

The defendant Mack Rigsbee excepted to this instruction, and on his appeal assigns same as error.

There is no error in the instruction. See S. v. Hardy, 209 N. C., 83, 182 S. E., 831.

Ro error.