State v. Albano
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On exception by respondent. The respondent was indicted at the January Term of the Superior Court for the County of Cumberland, 1920, for keeping and maintaining a gambling nuisance in violation of Section 1, Chapter 23, of the Revised Statutes. Respondent requested a drawn jury and the eleventh juryman was challenged for cause-by respondent which was overruled by the presiding Justice, and the respondent took exception. Case is stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtWilson, J.
The respondent was being tried on an indictment charging him with keeping and maintaining a gambling nuisance. A drawn jury was requested by the respondent. The eleventh *473juryman upon being sworn on his voir dire in reply to a question by respondent’s counsel as to his views on card and pool playing said: “I feel that a community would be better off without either pleasure, as a whole.”
And in response to an inquiry by the court as to whether he thought his views would prevent him from rendering a true verdict upon the evidence presented in court said: “No, sir, I think I should not be…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- People v. DurrantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- State v. HoytSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1880
- Wright v. . Bank of the MetropolisNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- State v. ElliottSupreme Court of Iowa · 1877
- Palmer v. PeopleNebraska Supreme Court · 1875
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Busby v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2005
- Ethridge v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1926
- Lattrell v. SwainSupreme Court of Vermont · 1968
- State v. ChattleySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1978
- Jones v. SheaSupreme Court of Vermont · 1987
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.