The Ocala evening star. [volume] (Ocala, Fla.) 1895-1943, 1920-07-02
DECISION Of
JUDGE BULLOCK
Reversing the Finding of the Court
Below in the Perry Edwards

DtfoH III IAtc EcA19 EuW dAuS
Case
In the Circuit Court of the Fifth Ju,
dicial Circuit of the State of Flor
ida, Marion County. Exercising APP.
pellate Jurisdiction to Review 1.-THE
Judgment of the County Judge 5fol
Marion County.
Perry Edwards, Appellant and Plain
tiff in Error. Versus the State Of
Florida, Appellee and Defendant IN
Error. Appeal from che County
Judges Court of Marion County
Florida. r. A. Burford, for the
Plaintiff in Error; L. N. Green, fol
the Defendant in Error.
From a conviction before the e0lIr1
of the county judge for Marion cohn
ty, Florida, on an affidavit wherein
defendant is charged that son ol
about the 25th day of January, AID
1920, Perry Edwards did sell intdzi
eating liquors in Marion county, Flpr
ida, the plaintiff in error takes hi
appeal to this court and has nine s
Isignments of error.
Over the objection of the defend
ant, one Henry Gordon, a witness fol
the state, testified, in substance, tha
sometime prior to January 25th, 1890
about two months prior to that tine
that he had searched the premises 10.
the defendant and found less tlhI
two quarts of moonshine liquor in /
jug, and he took one quart anC
brought it to the sheriff, who came Z
the conclusion that there was not suf
ficient evidence to prosecute. TIL:
was objected to by the defendant, AM
was overruled and Mr.. Green saic
go on and state what search yel
made" This question was objectet
to and the Judge overruled the obj9
tion, which constitutes the first sss
lsignment Of error.
The witness then testified as abo4,
stated, and the defendant moved &
fstrike it out, which motion was Over
ruled and this forms the basis for tAt
second assignment of error.
The court charged the jury "tha
the finding of Intoxicating liquors d
sufficient quantity in the possession
of the defendant at any time within
two years prior to the swearing oa
of the affidavit, is prima facie evi
dence of guilt in the prosecution fol
sale of Intoxicating liquor" and Gov
stitutes the third assignment of error
Defendant produced Joe Taylor anC
| A. S. Pickett as witnesses to prove
his general reputation IN the neigh
borhood in which he lives "for peac'
as a law-abiding citizen"
In their cross examination thes'
witnesses said: 81 have heard som,
rumors as to his making and selling
Liquor, but I did not believe it" Il
lrebuttal to this testimony the stat
lproduced j. P. Galloway, the sheriff
and Henry Gordon. the deputy sheriff
OF Marion county, and S. G. M. Thorn
as, city marshal of Ocala. Over tn
objection of the defendant each test
fed as "to rumors and character d
the defendant as to sale of intoxieat
ing liquors and the making of noou
shine" and forms the basis for
fourth and the fifth assignments d
error. The sixth assignment of erro
| is in the overruling of the defendant
motion for a new trial.
/ Seventh assignment of error is i
passing judgment and sentence.
The eighth assignment of error
not arresting the judgment.
Ninth assignment of error is tina
the judgment and sentence as to tn
lime and the penalty is excessive.
/ This prosecution is under Chapte
l7736 Acts of 1918. Section one of thi
Iact makes it unlawful for any perso
Ito sell any alcoholic or intoxicatin
liquors. Section five of the chaptel
(which section has been amended an
the amendment was in force ait tn
time of the swearing out of the wal
rant, authorizes the possession of nc
more than four quarts of alcohol
Tor Intoxicating liquors, but with
lproviso saying: provided such pei
son obtained and had in his possessio
said liquors before this act became
llaw." The act became law May l.
.l1919.
i Section 13 says: "And the posses
lfsion by any person of any quantity 6
what is called rum or moonshine lie
Iuor, shall in all of the courts of thi
state, in any prosecution of proceed
ling for the violation of any of th
Iprovisions OF sections one. three an
four of this act. be deemed prim
4 Ifacie evidence of the violation of an
of such provisions"
II First and second assignments {
error relate to this feature of til
i trial and may be considered togethe
i The commission of the crime is a
legged TO have been on the 25th Z
January, "A. d. 1920. It was base
lon the fact of an actual sale of into1
!; Iicating liquor to one Clarance Lang
! ford on that date.
i Langford swore it was zone gallo
;lof moonshine whisky, intoxicatin
,lliquor.a
! Mr.. Gordon was permitted to te:
), tify, over the objection of the defenc
liant, of making a search of defenc
lant's premises and the finding of les
than two quarts of moonshine iquo
! 1.-TWO months prior to January 25tl
I 1920. The defendant then moved
-+,-sIr<z rN,.% s,,oE-