Fiorella v. City of Birmingham
Alabama Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
HARWOOD, Judge.
This appellant stands convicted of violating an ordinance of the City of Birmingham pertaining to policy games.
The complaint filed against the appellant in the circuit court, omitting the formal parts, charges that appellant, “within twelve *387months before the beginning of this prosecution, and within the City of Birmingham or the police jurisdiction thereof, did possess tickets, writings, papers, articles, matters, or things of a nature or kind, which are customarily or usually used in the operation of a lottery, policy game, or other game of chance, contrary to and in violation…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Arant v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1936
- Fitzpatrick v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1910
- Brooks v. City of BirminghamAlabama Court of Appeals · 1944
- City of Birmingham v. ReedAlabama Court of Appeals · 1949
- Stinson v. City of BirminghamAlabama Court of Appeals · 1944
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by56 opinions
- Nichols v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1958
- Van Antwerp v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1978
- State v. SpurlockCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1981
- Ex Parte DialSupreme Court of Alabama · 1980
- McKinney v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1973
51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.