People v. Herbert

<p>Abstract of the Decision.</p> <p>1. Criminal law, § 449*—when question as to method of procuring jwry not preserved for review. Where the bill of exceptions fails to show how the jury were drawn or summoned or that there was any error in that respect, merely showing that one or more jurymen were called into the jury box from the bystanders, and the points in writing filed by defendant with his motion for a new trial and with his motion in arrest of judgment do not include anything on the subject, the question of the method of procuring a jury is not preserved for review.</p> <p>2. Criminal law, § 541*—when exclusion of evidence not ground for reversal. On an information for selling liquor in anti-saloon territory possible error of the court in refusing to permit defendant to explain why he procured Federal license for retailing liquor in such territory is not ground for reversal where he was afterwards permitted to make full explanation.</p> <p>3. Intoxicating liquors, § 151*—when verdict in prosecution for illegal sale not against weight of evidence. On an information for selling liquor in anti-saloon territory, the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence merely because the sole proof of defendant’s guilt was the evidence of two detectives which was wholly contradicted by the evidence of defendant and his clerk.</p> <p>4. Intoxicating liquors, § 151*—when evidence sufficient to support finding of sale in anti-saloon territory. Evidence on an information for selling intoxicating liquors in anti-saloon territory examined and held to support a verdict of guilty.</p> <p>5. Intoxicating liquors, § 158*—when instruction as to effect of issuance of Federal receipt proper. On an information for selling intoxicating liquors in anti-saloon territory, an instruction that the issuance of an internal revenue special tax stamp or receipt by the United States to any person as a retail dealer in liquors or in malt liquor at any place in anti-saloon territory is prima facie evidence of the sale of intoxicating liquor by such person at such place or at any place of business of such person within anti-saloon territory where such receipt is posted, provided a sale of liquor of any kind is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, regardless of the kind of liquor sold, is not improper for failure to require not only the issuance of such receipt but its posting at his place of business, where the instruction follows the language of the statute and defendant causes the court to give a second instruction for him to the same effect which does not require the posting of such notice.</p> <p>6. Criminal law, § 558*—when error in giving or refusing instructions not ground for reversal. Even though the rulings upon the giving or refusing of instructions are subject to criticism, yet if the jury were sufficiently and fully instructed when all the instructions given are taken into consideration, such ruling is not ground for reversal.</p>