State v. Stover

Supreme Court of Louisiana

State v. Stover

35 So. 405, 111 La. 92, 1903 La. LEXIS 496

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedNovember 16, 1903

DocketNo. 14,962

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 35 So. 405 (State v. Stover) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Stover, 35 So. 405, 111 La. 92, 1903 La. LEXIS 496 (La. 1903).

Pincite

Opinion

NICHOLLS, C. J.

The’only question presented to us for decision is whether under the indictment found on the 10th day of July, 1903, charging that the defendant, in the parish of Red River, did on the 1st day of May, 1903, unlawfully keep a grog and tippling [93]*93shop, and. then and there retail spirituous liquors, without previously obtaining a license, it was permissible for the state to introduce evidence that the accused had done so some time in the middle of May, 1903.

Under the authority of section 1063 of the Revised Statutes of 1876, and repeated decisions of this court, this question must be answered in the affirmative, and this answer carried with it the affirmance of the judgment appealed from. See State v. Aqudo et al., 5 La. Ann. 185; State v. Walters, 16 La. Ann. 400; State v. Wallman, 31 La. Ann. 147; State v. Polite, 33 La. Ann. 1016; State v. Kane, 33 La. Ann. 1269; State v. Johnson, 35 La. Ann. 842; State v. Hamilton, 48 La. Ann. 1566, 21 South. 232; State v. Hardaway, 50 La. Ann. 1348, 24 South. 320; State v. Ackerman, 51 La. Ann. 1213, 26 South. 80.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed.

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

NICHOLLS, C. J.

The’only question presented to us for decision is whether under the indictment found on the 10th day of July, 1903, charging that the defendant, in the parish of Red River, did on the 1st day of May, 1903, unlawfully keep a grog and tippling [93]*93shop, and. then and there retail spirituous liquors, without previously obtaining a license, it was permissible for the state to introduce evidence that the accused had done so some time in the middle of May, 1903.

Under the authority of section 1063 of the Revised Statutes of 1876, and repeated decisions of this court, this question must be answered in the affirmative, and this answer carried with it the affirmance of the judgment appealed from. See State v. Aqudo et al., 5 La. Ann. 185; State v. Walters, 16 La. Ann. 400; State v. Wallman, 31 La. Ann. 147; State v. Polite, 33 La. Ann. 1016; State v. Kane, 33 La. Ann. 1269; State v. Johnson, 35 La. Ann. 842; State v. Hamilton, 48 La. Ann. 1566, 21 South. 232; State v. Hardaway, 50 La. Ann. 1348, 24 South. 320; State v. Ackerman, 51 La. Ann. 1213, 26 South. 80.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

35 So. 405, 111 La. 92, 1903 La. LEXIS 496, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-stover-la-1903.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack