Case ID: ohio-law-abs_1/html/0751-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "ALLREAD, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 766
    STATE v. TEFANOV
    Ohio Appeals, 2nd District, Montgomery County
    No. 487.
    Decided July 20, 1923
    225, INTOXICATING LIQUORS.
    Proof of liquor law violation — Conflict of testimony.
    Attorneys1 — A. H. Scharrer and P. J. Workman, for State; F. W. Kreehbiel, for Tefanov.'
   ALLREAD, J.

Epitomized - Opinion

Tefanov was convicted in the Dayton Municipal Court of possessing intoxicating liquors. The Common Pleas reversed the judgment and discharged Tefanov. He kept a soft drink place which officers entered and there purchased whiskey. Tefanov was not present at that; time. Later in the day the officers returned and requested drinks but were refused by Tefanov. They testified that he emptied a quart container in the sink and they salvaged s.ome of this, which upon analysis was found to contain 14.5% alcohol. Tefanov testified in his own defense and called certain other witnesses. In reversing’ the Common Pleas and sustaining the conviction of the Municipal Court, the Court of Appeals held: '

1. ’’There was a conflict of testimony, but we are unable to find that the finding and judgment of the Municipal Court was against the manifest weight of the evidence.”