188 Ind. 606 | Ind. | 1919
Appellant’s motion in arrest of judgment was timely made and overruled, and this ruling is assigned as error. The only question presented by this appeal is, Was appellant charged with a public offense?
Section 35, supra, reads as follows: “Within ten (10) days after the date when this act has become operative, every person except licensed pharmacists, wholesale druggists, manufacturing chemists or public hospitals shall remove or cause to be removed all intoxicating liquors in his possession from the state and failure to do so shall be prima facie evidence that such liquor is kept therein for the purpose of being sold, bartered, exchanged, given away, - furnished or otherwise disposed of in violation of the provisions of this act: Provided, however, That this section shall not apply to alcohol kept for chemical or manufacturing purposes, or to one (1) gallon of intoxicating liquor, other than beer, or twelve (12) quarts of beer, or all wine manufactured for his own domestic consumption kept in his own home for domestic use, held by an individual; and provided further, that any licensed pharmacist, wholesale druggist, manufacturing chemist or public hospital shall report to the clerk of the circuit court within said ten (10) ■ day period the kinds and amount of intoxicating liquor on hand.”
We therefore conclude that the second count of the affidavit upon which appellant was tried and convicted failed to state a public offense, and the motion in arrest of judgment should have beén sustained.
Judgment reversed, with instructions to the trial court to sustain appellant’s motion in arrest of judgment, and for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
Note. — Tienorted in 5.25 N. E. 397.