State v. Kearns
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Defendant was indicted by the grand jury of Polk county for the crime of permitting a gambling device to.be set up on certain premises, tried in the district court before Watts, J., and a jury which found defendant guilty as charged in the indictment. From an order denying his motion for a new trial, defendant appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtHallam, J.
Defendant was convicted of the crime of permitting a gambling device or gaming table to be set- up and used upon his premises at which the game of poker is played. The evidence was conflicting. The defendant “does not upon this appeal question the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict.” The only objection raised is to the charge of the court. To understand the charge it is necessary to note some of the evidence.
Defendant conducted a pool room in East Grand Forks. Soft drinks, confectionery and cigars were sold. The place was “open all night.” In the rear of the pool room was a…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. YatesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- State v. JonesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
3Cited by1 opinion
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1918