TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

State v. Muse

State v. Jim Muse.

State v. Muse, 107 S.E. 320 (N.C. 1921)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of North Carolina · State Highest Courts
Decided
May 25, 1921
Judges
PER CURIAM.
Citations
107 S.E. 320181 N.C. 5061921 N.C. LEXIS 130
Headnotes
Intoxicating Liquors — Spirituous Liquors — Statutes—Constitutional Law —Federal Constitution — Federal Statutes. A State statute in furtherance of, and not in conflict with, the Federal Prohibition Law, may be declared a valid exercise of the police power of' the State, expressly sanctioned by the Eighteenth Amendment, to the Constitution of the United States.
Summary
Appeal by defendant from McElroy, J., at March Term,' 1921, of BTJNCOMBE. Criminal indictment charging the defendant with transporting, receiving, keeping on hand for sale and selling spirituous and intoxicating-liquors, contrary to the form of the statute in such eases made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the State. The evidence of’ guilt was direct and positive. “The defendant demurred to the jurisdiction of the court for that the-Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States repealed all State laws regarding the manufacture, sale and transportation of liquor within the United' States.” This is the defendant’s only exception. From a verdict of guilty and judgment thereon, defendant appealed.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Per Curiam

Per Curiam.

The judgment of the Superior Court must be affirmed on authority of S. v. Fore, 180 N. C., 744 . A State statute in further- *507 anee of, and not in conflict with, the Federal prohibition law may be declared a valid exercise of the police power of the State and is sanctioned, in express terms, by the Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

No error.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1921: 21922: 11923: 119212026peak 1921 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Palmer v. State133 N.E. 388 (Ind. 1921)
  2. State v. Campbell110 S.E. 86 (N.C. 1921)
  3. State v. Harrison114 S.E. 830 (N.C. 1922)
  4. State v. Brame116 S.E. 164 (N.C. 1923)

Most recent

  1. State v. Brame116 S.E. 164 (N.C. 1923)
  2. State v. Harrison114 S.E. 830 (N.C. 1922)
  3. State v. Campbell110 S.E. 86 (N.C. 1921)
  4. Palmer v. State133 N.E. 388 (Ind. 1921)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list