Territory of Hawaii v. Shinohara
Hawaii Supreme Court
1Dissent
*37DISSENTING OPINION OF
STAINBACK, J.
I respectfully dissent from the foregoing opinion of the court. Although dissenting opinions are usually futile and of little value, I cannot concur with the majority of this court in upsetting what has been the law of this Territory for decades (at least since the decision in Territory v. Beeson, 23 Haw. 445, of August 10, 1916) that the operation of a slot machine is the operation of a lottery within the provisions of sections 11340 and 11341; there is in essence no difference between the operation of a slot machine and that of a pinball game (called the…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- United States v. WiltbergerSupreme Court of the United States · 1820
- United States v. HartwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1868
- United States v. FreemanSupreme Court of the United States · 1845
- United States v. LacherSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Sundry Goods, Wares & Merchandises v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1829
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.