State v. Dunning

Citations

• 14 S.D. 316
• 85 N.W. 589
• 1901 S.D. LEXIS 16

Syllabus

<p>1. In a prosecution for selling intoxicating liquors, as a beverage, without a license, under Laws 1897, Chap. 72, which took effect March 3, 1897, it was error to permit evidence of sales by defendants which was not limited to sales made between the time when the statute took effect and when the indictment was presented.</p> <p>2. Laws 1897, Chap. 72, § 5, provides that any person selling intoxicating liquors without a license shall be punished, and Section 27 provides that a registered pharmacist selling intoxicating liquors to be used as a beverage shall be fined for the first offense, and for the second shall forfeit his registration, and be liable to all penalties, prosecutions and proceedings against persons selling without authority. Held, that defendants who were registered pharmacists, and not guilty of a second offense, could not be convicted of selling intoxicating liquors as a beverage at retail without a license.</p> <p>3. In a prosecution for selling intoxicating liquors without a license, it was improper for the prosecuting attorney in his argument to state that the defendants “under prohibition, always run a blind pig, and are now selling.”</p>