State v. Scarlett

Supreme Court of Arkansas

State v. Scarlett

38 Ark. 563

DecidedMay 15, 1882

StatusPublished

This text of 38 Ark. 563 (State v. Scarlett) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Scarlett, 38 Ark. 563 (Ark. 1882).

Pincite

Opinion

Harrison, J.

The indictment in this case is bad. It did not negative the exception in the act, or aver that the-sale of the ardent spirits was not for medical purposes by a regular practicing physician, and who had made and recorded the affidavit prescribed by the act. 1 Bish. Crim. Proced., secs. 631, 636; 1 Chit. Crim. Law, 284; Thompson v. The State, 37 Ark., 408. As for that reason the-judgment must be affirmed, we need not consider the exceptions taken by the State upon the trial.

Affirmed.

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

Harrison, J.

The indictment in this case is bad. It did not negative the exception in the act, or aver that the-sale of the ardent spirits was not for medical purposes by a regular practicing physician, and who had made and recorded the affidavit prescribed by the act. 1 Bish. Crim. Proced., secs. 631, 636; 1 Chit. Crim. Law, 284; Thompson v. The State, 37 Ark., 408. As for that reason the-judgment must be affirmed, we need not consider the exceptions taken by the State upon the trial.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 Ark. 563, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-scarlett-ark-1882.