Legal Opinion

Van Pelt v. State

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided February 9, 1952PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Buenett

Under a three count indictment the plaintiff in error was convicted on the second count, only, which charged that she ‘ ‘ did unlawfully and willfully have in her possession certain gaming devices, commonly known as lottery, or policy slips, with the unlawful and willful intent to encourage and promote gambling.” This indictment is based and laid on Code Section 5250 which provides: “No person shall have in his possession any gambling table or any device whatever for the enticement of any person to gamble. ’ ’

The Code further in Section 11282 fixes the penalty for the violation of the Code…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Hughes v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Elliott Et Ux. v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1938
  3. Rosen v. Superintendent of Police Le StrangeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
  4. Bowmer v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1928
  5. Cowan v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1906

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Jamison v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1967
  2. White v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1962
  3. Church v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Armour v. TottyTennessee Supreme Court · 1972
  5. State v. PrevoHawaii Supreme Court · 1961

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API