55 Fla. 17 | Fla. | 1908
—The plaintiff in error was convicted of the offense of engaging in and carrying on the business of a dealer in liquors in the county of Leon, which said county had voted against the sale of said liquors. The only contention here is that the verdict is contrary to and unsupported by the evidence.
William M. Langston, a witness for the state, testified as' follows : “During the month of December, 1906, I was chief of police of the city of Tallahassee. On the 14th day of such month, I was standing in front of the city market with Jackson Gray, who was then an officer of the,police force of the city of Tallahassee, and I saw Ben Bryant go to the fish stall occupied by Israel Fisher and hand to Fisher a silver dollar. After-wards Mr. Gray and myself saw Ben Bryant walk in the direction of the rear of the market .building. Mr. Gray and myself then went up stairs in the city council chamber over the market where we have a view of the
Ben Bryant testified for the state as follows: “During the second week in December, 1906, I met Julia Brown on the street near the market house in Tallahassee. She gave me a dollar and asked me to go over and get her a pint of whiskey from Israel Fisher. I went over to Fisher’s stall and gave him the dollar and told him I wanted a pint of whiskey. I went round to the fear of Fisher’s stall and he handed, me a pint of whiskey wrapped up in a piece of paper and put fiwentyfive cents in change on top of a barrel in the rear of the stall. I took up the change from the top of the barrel. I then went back to the front of the market, handed the whiskey to a negro man from the country and requested
The defendant testified as follows: “My name is Israel Fisher and I have been engaged in the fish business in the city of Tallahassee for the past thirty years and I am now still engaged in the fish business in Tallahassee. During the month of December, 1906, and for sometime prior thereto I was engaged in the fish business in Quincy, Florida. It was my custom from the time I became engaged in the fish business in Quincy to go to Quincy from Tallahassee every Friday afternoon of each week for the purpose of looking after my fish business there. I usually returned to Tallahassee on the following Sunday afternoon. During the second week in December, 1906, Alfred Do-nalson, Hardy Croom, William Smith, Sawnee Moore and, Thomas Nix each came to me at different times and different places and gave me three dollars and requested me to buy three dollars worth of whiskey for them the next time J went to Quincy, stating that they wanted to lay in a supply of whiskey for Christmas. I agreed to buy the whiskey for them as they were all old friends and regular fish customers of mine. On account of these parties being old friends and regular customers of mine I had frequently purchased whiskey for them at their request while in Quincy and never in any case charging
Alfred Donalson, Hardy Croom, William Smith, Sawnee Moore, Thomas Nix and G. W. Hale corroborated the defendant so far as their dealings with him were concerned.
In construing section 3557 General Statutes of 1906, we have held that proof of the delivery of whiskey to a person by the defendant and the receipt of money therefor by him is prima 'facie evidence of the ownership of said whiskey by the defendant, and casts upon him the burden of rebutting the legal presumption. Goode v. State, 50 Fla. 45, 39 South. Rep. 461; Massey v. State, 50 Fla. 109, 39 South, Rep. 790.
The evidence established that the defendant delivered whiskey to Bryant and received seventy-five cents for it, thereby making out a prima facie case of the
. It is true the defendant said that after his trial in the Mayor’s court he gave Ben Bryant three pints of whiskey, which was the balance of the whiskey purchased for Bryant in Quincy; but Bryant said, “At the time I got the whiskey for Julia Brown from Fisher I had not gotten from him all the whiskey which he had bought for me in Quincy. I had gotten two pints, and after the trial in the Mayor’s court I got the balance, but the -whiskey I bought from Fisher for Julia Brown was not a part of the whiskey which Fisher had bought for me.”
So there was conflict in the evidence on this point, and there were suspicious circumstances, such as the delivery of the whiskey in a stealthy manner, and the large number of whiskey labels in defendant’s fish bin. See Reynold v. State, 52 Fla. 409, 42 South. Rep. 373.
The jury accepted as true the testimony for the State, and we think it sufficient to support the verdict.
The judgment is affirmed.
Taylor and H’ocker, JJ., concur;
Shackleford, C. J., Cockrell and Whitfield, JJ., concur in the opinion.