State v. McAdams

Citations

• 106 La. 720

Syllabus

<p>Syllabus.</p> <p>1. The issuing of a State license to a person as a wholesale and retail liquor dealer does not authorize him to retail alcoholic liquors without a parish license in a parish where such a license is required, as a condition precedent to making such sales therein.</p> <p>2. The Appellate Court will accept as correct the ultimate conclusions of fact .as to the venue of the crime charged and the guilt of the party accused, which the district judge, who decided a criminal case, reached from the consideration of the entire testimony on the trial. It cannot go behind them and review them in order to test their correctness. (State vs. Clifford, 45 Ann. 983 ; State vs. Kennon, 45 Ann. 1193.)</p> <p>3. It is only through testimony adduced that it can be ascertained whether • orders sent by an agent in DeSoto Parish to his principal, a merchant in Caddo Parish, to forward goods by express to certain parties in DeSoto, price payable C. O. D., evidence merely “offers to buy” made by the parties in DeSoto, or whether the orders are sent on for the carrying into execution by the principal of absolute sales of goods by the agent in DeSoto to the parties there.</p> <p>4. In order that a party should be guilty of retailing alcoholic liquors in a particular parish without a license from the parochial authorities of that parish, it is not essential that he should be actually present in that parish at the time of the sales. He may be constructively present.</p>