History
  • No items yet
midpage
State v. Allen
122 Wash. 199
| Wash. | 1922
|
Check Treatment
Mitchell, J.

-The appellant was convicted, upon a trial by jury, of the crime of being a jointist, and has appealed.

The argument on behalf of the appellant that the prohibition law of this state has been displaced by the eighteenth amendment to the constitution of the United States and the Volstead act passed pursuant thereto has been answered in the negative by a number of our decisions from that of State v. Turner, 115 Wash. 170, 196 Pac. 638, down to State v. McFee, 121 Wash. 425, 209 Pac. 683.

The other assignments of error call in question the sufficiency of the evidence to justify the verdict and *200judgment. It was shown by an abundance of proof that the appellant personally sold quantities of intoxicating liquor to different persons in the building described in the information as the Carlton Hotel, situated at 310 Columbia street, Olympia, Washington, while the hotel was being conducted and maintained by him as lessee and manager. The proof presented a olear case for the jury to decide. The fact that the principal purpose for running the place was to furnish hotel accommodations was of itself no defense to the charge. State v. Greenwald, 116 Wash. 463, 199 Pac. 730.

Affirmed.

Parker, C. J., Holcomb, Mackintosh, and Bridges, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: State v. Allen
Court Name: Washington Supreme Court
Date Published: Nov 8, 1922
Citation: 122 Wash. 199
Docket Number: No. 17586
Court Abbreviation: Wash.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.