Cain v. State
Supreme Court of Alabama
FROM the Circuit Court of Blount. Tried before the Hon. S. D. Hale. “ON the trial of this ease,” as the bill of exceptions states, “the State proved, that the defendant, with two or three other persons, on one occasion within twelve months before the finding of the indictment, played cards in an outhouse in Brooksville in said county, in a room of which the door was fastened, and where the parties could not be seen from without; and that said parties went to said room, af…
Read the full summary
FROM the Circuit Court of Blount. Tried before the Hon. S. D. Hale. “ON the trial of this ease,” as the bill of exceptions states, “the State proved, that the defendant, with two or three other persons, on one occasion within twelve months before the finding of the indictment, played cards in an outhouse in Brooksville in said county, in a room of which the door was fastened, and where the parties could not be seen from without; and that said parties went to said room, af that particular time, for the purpose of playing cards. There was no proof that these parties, or any other parties, had…
1Opinion of the CourtBice, C. J.
Under the proof in this case, as set out in the bill of exceptions, the house in which the playing took place is not an “outhouse where people resort,” within the meaning of section 3243 of the Code. The evidence did not authorize a conviction of the defendant, and the charge of the court was erroneous.
The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.
2Cited by1 opinion
- Downey v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1891