Turner v. Commonwealth

Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)

Turner v. Commonwealth

286 S.W. 1038, 215 Ky. 748, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 778

CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)

DecidedOctober 1, 1926

StatusPublished

This text of 286 S.W. 1038 (Turner v. Commonwealth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Turner v. Commonwealth, 286 S.W. 1038, 215 Ky. 748, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 778 (Ky. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion of the Court by

Commissioner Drury

Affirming.

Will Turner was fined $200.00 and given a jail sentence- of sixty days for the unlawful possession of spirituous liquor. The Commonwealth introduced A. A. Cummins, a constable, who had gone to the house of Cam Ashinhurst for the purpose of searching the place. Turner is a son-in-law of and lives with Mr. Ashinhurst. When the officer came Turner hurriedly left, for the barn. The officer followed him. He discovered Turner tailing something out of a basket and putting it through the fence. The officer went to see what it was and found five half-gallon fruit cans and one quart bottle, all of which had some whiskey in them. One of the cans had something like-a big drink in.it. Turner’s reputation for trafficking in whiskey was shown to be bad. No objection was made to' the 'evidence, and having failed to object to the evidence in the trial court, he can not now raise the question of its admissibility here.

; Turner'is complaining' of the instructions, but we have examined them and can find no foundation for his complaint.'

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Opinion of the Court by

Commissioner Drury

Affirming.

Will Turner was fined $200.00 and given a jail sentence- of sixty days for the unlawful possession of spirituous liquor. The Commonwealth introduced A. A. Cummins, a constable, who had gone to the house of Cam Ashinhurst for the purpose of searching the place. Turner is a son-in-law of and lives with Mr. Ashinhurst. When the officer came Turner hurriedly left, for the barn. The officer followed him. He discovered Turner tailing something out of a basket and putting it through the fence. The officer went to see what it was and found five half-gallon fruit cans and one quart bottle, all of which had some whiskey in them. One of the cans had something like-a big drink in.it. Turner’s reputation for trafficking in whiskey was shown to be bad. No objection was made to' the 'evidence, and having failed to object to the evidence in the trial court, he can not now raise the question of its admissibility here.

; Turner'is complaining' of the instructions, but we have examined them and can find no foundation for his complaint.'

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

286 S.W. 1038, 215 Ky. 748, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 778, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/turner-v-commonwealth-kyctapphigh-1926.