7 Ga. App. 751

2590.

Snell v. The State.

Hill, C. J.

1. An accusation charging that the accused ‘‘did sell and barter, for valuable consideration, alcoholic, spirituous, malt, and intoxicating liquors, and intoxicating bitters” is in the language of the statute, and is sufficiently definite, although it fails to designate the “valuable consideration,” or to specify the kind of intoxicating liquors or intoxicating bitters sold or bartered.

2. Several of the excerpts objected to from the charge contained technical inaccuracies, but these could not have misled or confused the jury or *752Imrt tli© accused. No material error of law was committed, and the evidence supports the verdict.

Accusation of sale of liquor; from city court of Fitzgerald— Judge Wall. March 14, 1910.

Submitted May 3,

Decided May 12, 1910.

Otis II. Elkins, for plaintiff in error.

A. J. McDonald, solicitor, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

Russell J., dissents from the 2d division of the decision.

Snell v. State
7 Ga. App. 751

Case Details

Name
Snell v. State
Decision Date
May 12, 1910
Citations

7 Ga. App. 751

Jurisdiction
Georgia

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!