Case ID: ohio-law-abs_2/html/0759-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "BY THE COURT.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 796
    ROTUNO v. STATE
    Ohio Appeals, 2d Dist, Montgomery County
    No. 566.
    Decided Sept. 11, 1924
    661. INTOXICATING (LIQUORS — 1. Possession of wine of excessive alcoholic content, held unlawful.
    2. Failure to contradict charge of possession of beer held to show violation in this regard.
    Attorneys — Egan & Delscamp, for Rotuno; Albert H. Seharrer and P. J.-Wortman, and Charles M. Earhart, for State.
   BY THE COURT.

Epitomized Opinion

Publish-ed Only in Ohio Law Abstract

Rotuno was convicted of having intoxicating liquors in his possession. The evidence disclosed that he had about 8% barrels of wine showing an alcoholic content of 8.95%. There was' also some evidence that he had some home brew in his possession. Rotuno claimed that the Wine was made for family use and that he had never sold or delivered the same. In sustaining the conviction, the Court of Appeals held:

1. Possession of wine containing more than one-half of one per cent of alcohol is unlawful.

2. As there was no evidence offered by the accused to contradict the charge of having beer in his possession, that fact alone warranted a conviction.