Opinion
No. 17.
September 3, 1929.
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Oklahoma.
Dan Coyle was convicted of unlawfully selling and delivering whisky, and he brings error. Affirmed.
J.Q.A. Harrod and Laynie W. Harrod, both of Oklahoma City, Okla., for plaintiff in error.
Roy St. Lewis, U.S. Dist. Atty., of Oklahoma City, Okla. (Herbert K. Hyde, Asst. U.S. Atty., of Oklahoma City, Okla., on the brief), for the United States.
Before PHILLIPS and McDERMOTT, Circuit Judges.
This appeal challenges the sufficiency of the information, upon the sole ground that it did not sufficiently identify the offense charged. The information in part alleged that the defendant, on January 22, 1927, in Oklahoma county, in the Western district of the state of Oklahoma, did unlawfully sell and deliver to Orival Snook intoxicating liquor, to wit, whisky. In the lower court, the attack on the information was by motion in arrest of judgment. The information alleged the name of the purchaser. This sufficiently identified and ear-marked the offense. Swafford v. United States (C.C.A.) 25 F.2d 581; Davis v. United States (C.C.A.) 24 F.2d 814; Jarl v. United States (C.C.A.) 19 F.2d 891.
The appeal is frivolous, and the case is affirmed, with direction that the mandate of this court be issued forthwith.