
    SMITH v. STATE.
    Ohio Appeals, 8th Dist., Cuyahoga Co.
    No. 9332.
    Decided Oct. 29, 1928.
    First Publication of This Opinion.
    Syllabus by Editorial Staff.
    INTOXICATING LIQUOR.
    (330 P) Conviction, on charge of unlawful possession, of married woman living with husband, held unlawful. Watson v. State, 6 Abs. 167, followed and approved.
    Weltmar and Edenburg, Cleveland, for Smith.
    J. A. Kovachy, Cleveland, for State.
    HISTORY: — Beatrice Smith convicted in Municipal Court of Cleveland, on charge of unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor. Accused prosecutes error. Reversed and accused discharged. No action in Supreme Court prior to date of this publication.
    STATEMENT OF FACTS.
    This ease comes into this court on a petition in error to the Municipal Court of the City of Cleveland.
    In the court below the plaintiff in error was charged with having liquor in her pos-sesion in violation of law. The evidence shows that she was living with her husband Addie Smith, and that the husband rented the place and paid the rent and this plaintiff in error seems to be a hair dresser and had the name “hair dresser” on the window, I believe, but it is claimed that she only did work by going out to her customers.
   VICKERY, J.

However this may be, the evidence is clear that she was a married woman living with her husband and under the circumstances, and under the decision in Watson v. State of Ohio, published in the Ohio Law Abstract of March 17, 1928, decided by the Seventh District Court of Appeals, which we follow, the wife cannot be convicted. The conviction, therefore, under these circumstances, was erroneous in that it was not supported by sufficient evidence and contrary to law.

The judgment will, therefore, be reversed and the plaintiff in error discharged.

(Sullivan, P. J., and Levine, J., concur.)  