Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Ohio Circuit Courts V.1-35 Ohio Circuit Decisions Volume 21

Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Ohio Circuit Courts V.1-35 Ohio Circuit Decisions Volume 21

By (author) 

List price: US$39.18

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks

Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1911 edition. Excerpt: ...the gravamen of the oifense being the keeping of a place, it is not necessary to state the dates from which and to which the alleged keeping a place in violation of law is averred. 2. Om: UNLAWFUL SALE Pnovnx. SUFFICIENT T0 SUSTAIN CONVICTION. A conviction for keeping a place where intoxicating liquors are sold, etc., contrary to law, is suflicient if sustained by proof of one unlawful sale. 3. Cnasorno GENERAL VIOLATION or INTOXICATING Laws SUFFICIENT. An aflidavit averring unlawful sale of intoxicating liquors. and proof of any unlawful sale are suflicient to sustain a prosecution for violation of the liquor laws; it is not necessary to aver a particular statutory violation_ 4. Pnoor or CERTIFIED Corr or Locsr. OPTION ELECTION ro MAKE PBIMA Fscn: Cass NOT EXCLUSIVE Eviosncr-:, Section 1 of act 99 0. L. 35, the Rose local option law, making a certified copy of the result of a local option election sutficient proof thereof, is not exclusive; any competent evidence may be otfered to-sustain a prosecution for a violation of the act. 5. EVIDENCE or Crux-: r or POLICE TELLING WHERE OFFICER Osrsmro Liquor II SUFFICIENT. The admission of testimony of a chief of police merely stating "that a police oflicer told him where he got intoxicating liquors in dry territory" is not prejudicial error. Syllabus approved by the court. ERROR to ma_'or's court. Marriott 6' Freshwater. for plaintifi in error: E. S. Owen, for defendant in error: DONAHUE, J. This proceeding in error is prosecuted to reverse the judgment of the mayor of the city of Delaware, finding the plaintifi in error guilty of a misdemeanor, and adjudging him to pay a fine. The first contention is. that the aiiidavit filed with the mayor in this case is defective, and does...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 270 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 14mm | 485g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236972929
  • 9781236972927