State v. Blackwell

Decided December 15, 1920

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1920-12-15

Appeal by defendant from Bay, J., at tbe March Term, 1920, of HENDERSON. . Tbis is a criminal action, tried- upon an indictment cbarging tbe unlawful manufacture of intoxicating liquor. State’s EvideNce. Sheriff M. Allard Case: I know John Blackwell. He lives in tbe eastern part of Henderson County. I saw him at a blockade still on 3 January, 1920, over at Big Hungary, ten miles from here in tbis county. Mr. Hill and Mr.- Lyda were with me at tbe time.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently May 1927

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1920-12-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

AlleN, J.

¶1The evidence is sufficient to support the verdict, and goes beyond proof of preparation to commit the crime of manufacturing intoxicating liquor.

¶2It is true the cap and worm were not present, but they would not be needed for a week, and in the meantime the defendant was engaged in one of the processes of manufacture.

¶3 *735He bad not produced any of tbe completed product, but be was manufacturing it as rapidly as be could, knowing tbat tbe cap and worm would be available wben tbe beer was ready for distillation.

¶4Tbe sheriff also testified: /‘Tbe still bad been used before,” wbieb, in tbe absence of explanation, permitted tbe inference tbat tbe defendant bad been manufacturing at some other point, and was then engaged in changing bis location.

¶5Tbe evidence is as strong, if not stronger, than in S. v. Perry, 179 N. C., 718.

¶6No error.