80 Vt. 391 | Vt. | 1907
The respondent is charged with selling intoxicating liquor without authority. Specifications and amended specifications were filed in the case. A hearing was had on respondent’s motion for better and more complete specifications. The State’s Attorney stated to the Court that those filed were the best he was able to give. Whereupon the motion
The question of the sufficiency of the specifications was within the discretionary power of the court ánd not revisable. State v. Davis, 52 Vt. 376.
The fictitious or suppositional question of the admissibility of evidence will not be noticed.
Judgment affirmed and cause remanded.