Opinion
No. 19243.
Delivered December 15, 1937. Rehearing Denied January 26, 1938.
1. — Intoxicating Liquor (Possessing for Sale in Dry Area) — Affirmance.
Where complaint and information appeared regular, evidence heard before trial court was not brought forward for review, and no complaint of the rulings of trial judge was presented by bills of exception, and defendant entered a plea of guilty to offense charged and waived jury upon trial, conviction for unlawful possession of liquor for sale in a dry area would be affirmed.
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.2. — Intoxicating Liquor (Possessing for Sale in Dry Area) — Complaint and Information.
An information charging defendant with unlawfully possessing liquor for purpose of sale in a dry area, held charged an offense under the law, as against the contention that the election in county of Cherokee prohibited the sale of intoxicating liquors only and not possession for purposes of sale.
Appeal from County Court of Cherokee County. Hon. J. W. Chandler, Jr., Judge.
Appeal from conviction for the unlawful possession of liquor for sale in a dry area; penalty, fine of $150.
Affirmed.
The opinion states the case.
B. B. Perkins, of Rusk, for appellant.
Lloyd W. Davidson, State's Attorney, of Austin, for the State.
The conviction is for the unlawful possession of liquor for sale in a dry area; penalty assessed at a fine of $150.00.
The complaint and information appear regular. The evidence heard before the trial court is not brought forward for review. No complaints of the rulings of the trial judge have been presented by bills of exception. Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the offense charged and waived a jury upon the trial.
No error having been presented warranting a reversal, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Affirmed.
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.
Appellant, on motion for rehearing, earnestly contends that we erred in our original opinion in holding the information sufficient to charge an offense.
His contention seems to be that an election was held within and for the County of Cherokee, prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquors only, and not prohibiting the possession thereof for the purpose of sale. Consequently, he maintains that since the information charges him merely with the possession of intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale, it fails to charge an offense under the law.
This question has been recently decided adversely to appellant's contention. See Price v. State, 109 S.W.2d 198; Ferguson v. State, 110 S.W.2d 61; Cropper v. State, not yet reported. (Page 391 of this volume).
The motion for rehearing is overruled.
Overruled.
The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.