{
  "id": 1646439,
  "name": "Miller v. City of Helena",
  "name_abbreviation": "Miller v. City of Helena",
  "decision_date": "1955-04-18",
  "docket_number": "4803",
  "first_page": "1016",
  "last_page": "1018",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "224 Ark. 1016"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "277 S.W.2d 841"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "21 S. W. 2d 186",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.W.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "180 Ark. 408",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1393551
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/180/0408-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "214 Ark. 930",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        8726338
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/214/0930-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "23 S. W. 2d 615",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.W.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "180 Ark. 970",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1393524
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/180/0970-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "55 S. W. 850",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.W.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "67 Ark. 495",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1152551
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/67/0495-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 215,
    "char_count": 2386,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.464,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.333239313479978e-08,
      "percentile": 0.38906496093015464
    },
    "sha256": "625938888b10cbd4d985f4663b3d212852f0e4aadc52c21753a275fd52932828",
    "simhash": "1:6b2ebe5d11c45602",
    "word_count": 409
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:46:52.725032+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Miller v. City of Helena."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Minor W. Millwee, Justice.\nOn appeal from the Helena Municipal Court defendant was convicted, in Circuit Court for selling unstamped whiskey in violation of Ark. Stats., \u00a7 48-934, and for selling whiskey on Sunday in violation of \u00a7 48-904. The jury fixed punishment of a fine of $400 and six months imprisonment on the first charge, and a fine of $100 on the second charge. The jury\u2019s recommendation that the six months jail sentence be suspended was adopted by the court.\nDefendant contends the evidence was insufficient to sustain the verdict. According to the uncontradicted testimony of a Helena policeman and a deputy sheriff of Phillips County, they gave one \"Willie Butler two one-dollar bills, the serial numbers of which they first listed, on the Sunday in question, and sent him into defendant\u2019s house to buy whiskey while the officers waited outside. Shortly thereafter Butler came out of the house with a half pint of unstamped \u201cmoonshine\u201d whiskey. The officers immediately went into the house and found the two one-dollar bills on defendant\u2019s person and placed him under arrest. Defendant has the general reputation of being a bootlegger and another party with a similar reputation was found asleep in defendant\u2019s house at the time of the arrest.\nWhile the foregoing evidence was largely circumstantial it was substantial and sufficient to sustain the verdict under our decisions. Evidence of a similar nature was held sufficient to sustain a conviction in Dixon v. State, 67 Ark. 495, 55 S. W. 850; Davidson v. State, 180 Ark. 970, 23 S. W. 2d 615; and Wimberly v. State, 214 Ark. 930, 218 S. W. 2d 730. As the court stated in Scott v. State, 180 Ark. 408, 21 S. W. 2d 186: \u201cThere is no greater degree of certainty in proof required where the evidence is circumstantial than where it is direct, for in either ease the jury must be convinced of the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt. They are bound by their oaths to render a verdict upon all the evidence, and the law makes no distinction between direct evidence of a fact and evidence of circumstances from which the existence of the fact may be inferred. Nichols\u2019 Applied Evidence, Vol. 2, \u00a7 4, 1065; Underhill\u2019s Criminal Evidence, pages 14 and 16.\u201d\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Minor W. Millwee, Justice."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "A. M. Coates, for appellant.",
      "David Solomon, Jr., for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Miller v. City of Helena.\n4803\n277 S. W. 2d 841\nOpinion delivered April 18, 1955.\nA. M. Coates, for appellant.\nDavid Solomon, Jr., for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "1016-01",
  "first_page_order": 1038,
  "last_page_order": 1040
}