Judicial notice of status of county as wet or dry.

- In prosecution for selling tax-paid whiskey it is entirely unnecessary to allege or prove that county is not exempted from the provisions of law prohibiting sale of whiskey, this being a matter which shall be judicially recognized without introduction of proof. Dye v. State, 118 Ga. App. 570, 165 S.E.2d 183 (1968).

Inducement to sell or possess prohibited liquor no defense.

- If, at time in question and at time of solicitation for sale of whiskey, defendant was engaged in business of selling and possessing intoxicating liquor, it would be no defense that the defendant was merely induced by solicitation and misrepresentation to sell or possess such prohibited liquor. Sutton v. State, 59 Ga. App. 198, 200 S.E. 225 (1938), overruled on other grounds, Keaton v. State, 253 Ga. 70, 316 S.E.2d 452 (1984).

Defendant need not be owner to be convicted for illegal sale.

- All engaged in commission of misdemeanor are principals, and when a defendant works for another at the defendant's place of business, where the defendant's duties are to be performed, the defendant may be guilty of selling whiskey in dry county, even though the defendant is not owner of whiskey, but merely employee and agent of owner. Faucette v. State, 71 Ga. App. 331, 30 S.E.2d 808 (1944) (decided under former Code 1993 § 58-102).

No offense charged when indictment failed to allege whiskey bore no tax stamps.

- When a person is indicted merely for possession of whiskey at place of business for purpose of sale in wet county, indictment charges no offense unless it further charges that whiskey possessed did not bear required stamps. Womack v. State, 60 Ga. App. 761, 5 S.E.2d 96 (1939).

Burdens of proof.

- On an accusation or indictment couched in language of this section, defendant has burden of proving that liquor possessed is properly stamped and within legal limit. Requirement of purchase from authorized liquor retailer and requirement that liquor be held for use and not for sale are matters about which state has burden of proof. Jenkins v. State, 93 Ga. App. 360, 92 S.E.2d 43 (1956).

Evidence insufficient to raise defense of entrapment.

- Evidence that witness purchased whiskey with money furnished by officer, telling defendant that the witness had just gotten over a drunk and was feeling bad and begging defendant to sell the witness whiskey was not sufficient to raise defense of entrapment. Sutton v. State, 59 Ga. App. 198, 200 S.E. 225 (1938), overruled on other grounds, Keaton v. State, 253 Ga. 70, 316 S.E.2d 452 (1984) (decided under former Code 1993 § 58-102).

Evidence of possession alone insufficient to support conviction of sale.

- When one is being tried for illegal sale of whiskey, evidence that one was in possession of whiskey at or near time of alleged sale is admissible as a circumstance that one kept whiskey for sale or as corroboration of evidence that a sale had taken place, but such evidence, considered alone, will not support conviction of sale, and a charge to jury which leaves them under impression that it is sufficient, in and of itself, is clearly error. Springer v. State, 60 Ga. App. 641, 4 S.E.2d 679 (1939) (decided under former Code 1993 § 58-102).

Sufficient proof for conviction of owner's employee for illegal sale.

- Proof either that defendant directly or personally committed criminal offense (selling whiskey in dry county), or that the defendant aided or abetted criminal transaction of the defendant's employer at the employer's place of business, would authorize the defendant's conviction of offense of selling whiskey. Faucette v. State, 71 Ga. App. 331, 30 S.E.2d 808 (1944).

Evidence sufficient to convict for illegal possession.

- Statement of defendant that the defendant thought the defendant would be notified in the event of a raid, in connection with the defendant's other remarks and actions during course of search of club house, was sufficient to authorize jury to infer that the defendant was aiding and assisting in commission of misdemeanors of illegal possession of liquor and slot machines. Miller v. State, 94 Ga. App. 259, 94 S.E.2d 120 (1956).

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors, §§ 18 et seq., 66, 71, 225, 246 et seq.

C.J.S.

- 48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors, §§ 21, 27 et seq., 39, 41.

ALR.

- Power to prohibit the possession of intoxicating liquor, irrespective of any intention to traffic therein, 2 A.L.R. 1085.

Entrapment to commit offense against laws regulating sales of liquor, 55 A.L.R.2d 1322.

What constitutes "sale" of liquor in violation of statute or ordinance, 89 A.L.R.3d 551.

Criminal liability of member or agent of private club or association, or of owner or lessor of its premises, for violation of state or local liquor or gambling laws thereon, 98 A.L.R.3d 694.