69 S.E. 9 | N.C. | 1910
The defendant was indicted and convicted for selling whiskey without license in the city of Wilmington. The prosecuting witness testified to the sale to him and described minutely the circumstances under which he purchased, to wit: that he bought the whiskey in the defendant's place of business, in a cut-off compartment and by a dumb waiter. He made known his presence and his thirst; a tin cup appeared in a hole in the wall; he put in the money; the cup disappeared, and a bottle of whiskey appeared in a few seconds. Another witness for the State was permitted, over defendant's objection, to testify in corroboration that he had bought in the same place and by means of the same device, prior to the purchase by the prosecuting witness, to whom the particular sale was charged in the indictment to have been made. We do not see why this evidence was not competent. It was restricted by his Honor to the purpose of corroboration. Its purpose was definitely to fix upon the defendant the knowledge that the illicit traffic was being carried on in his place of business. It is inconceivable that such device could be arranged in defendant's place of business without his knowledge and aid, and if he aided in the commission of this offense — a misdemeanor by the law — he was guilty as a principal. S.v. Kittelle,
No error.
Cited: S. v. Colonial Club,
(604)
