State v. Baker
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
PROVOSTY, C. J.
The accused was charged with having had in his possession intoxicating liquors for beverage purposes in violation of Act No. 39 of 1921 (Ex. Sess.).
He moved to quash on the ground that the said act was unconstitutional. The motion was overruled. The intoxicating liquor in question was shown on the trial to have been whisky. The motion was properly overruled. See State v. Coco, this day decided, ante, p. 241, 92 South. 883 .
Another ground urged by accused is that the evidence fails to show his guilt. But the jurisdiction of this court is limited to questions of law, and the guilt vel non of accused is a question of fact-.
Judgment affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 6 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.