Sullivan v. State
This text of 87 S.W. 150 (Sullivan v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The information charges generally that appellant sold to L. S. Ray intoxicating liquors, without specifying the character or kind, in violation of the local option law. The alleged purchaser testified, that he “bought two bottles of beer from him (appellant) and paid him 25 cents for the' same.” He further stated that he bought the beer for some women because they desired him to do so. These women were strangers to witness. Appellant’s contention that the evidence does not show a violation of the law, in that it fails *202 to establish that the beer bought was intoxicating liquor, is well taken. Before the local option law can be violated, there must be proof of a sale of intoxicating liquors.
The judgment is accordingly reversed and the cause remanded.
Reversed and remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
87 S.W. 150, 48 Tex. Crim. 201, 1905 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sullivan-v-state-texcrimapp-1905.