Kittrell v. State
Citations
- 89 Miss. 666
- 42 So. 609
Syllabus
<p>1. Criminal Law. Sale of intoxicants. Separate sales. Election. Code 1906, § 1762.</p> <p>Under an indictment for the unlawful sale of intoxicants, defendant was entitled, before Code 1906, § 1762, seeking to change the practice, became operative, to demand that the state elect a particular sale and confine the testimony thereto; the statute has no application in the supreme court to trials had in the circuit court before it became operative.</p> <p>2. Same. Principal and accessory. Misdemeanors.</p> <p>One who aids and abets in the commission of a misdemeanor is indictable as a principal.</p> <p>3. Same. Indictment. Evidence. Variance.</p> <p>There is no variance between an indictment charging defendant with an unlawful sale of intoxicants and proof that the sale was made by defendant’s employe acting for defendant and with his knowledge and consent.</p> <p>4. Same. Instruction.</p> <p>An instruction is erroneous if it require a conviction of defendant for the unlawful sale of intoxicants upon proof that his agents for conducting a village store, without his knowledge, allowed a negro porter to make unlawful sales of intoxicants on the premises.</p>
Judges: Calhoon
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
3 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- King v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1889-04-15· cited 39×
- Wynn v. State.Mississippi Supreme Court· 1885-10-15· cited 25×
- Naul v. McComb CityMississippi Supreme Court· 1893-03-15· cited 7×
- Beck v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1891-10-15· cited 6×
- Ware v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1893-10-15· cited 2×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.