Snell v. State
Snell v. State
7 Ga. App. 751; 67 S.E. 1045; 1910 Ga. App. LEXIS 501
Snell v. State
Opinion of the Court
1. An accusation charging that the accused ‘‘did sell and barter, for valuable consideration, alcoholic, spirituous, malt, and intoxicating liquors, and intoxicating bitters” is in the language of the statute, and is sufficiently definite, although it fails to designate the “valuable consideration,” or to specify the kind of intoxicating liquors or intoxicating bitters sold or bartered.
2. Several of the excerpts objected to from the charge contained technical inaccuracies, but these could not have misled or confused the jury or
Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.