Dormer v. State
Indiana Supreme Court
ERROR to the Randolph Circuit Court.
1Opinion of the CourtPerkins, J.
Indictment for keeping a gaming house. The indictment charged, in the same count, that the defendant kept, and suffered his house to be used, for gaming, &c. It is insisted that this rendered the indictment bad, on the ground that it charged two offences. We think but one offence was charged. State v. Slocum, 8 Blackf. 315, and cases cited. — 2 Russ. on Cr. 708. Had the allegation been in the disjunctive, that the defendant kept, or suffered, &c., it would probably have been bad for uncertainty. Arch. Cr. Pl. 43.
The indictment contained the names of certain persons who, it averred, had played…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. SlocumIndiana Supreme Court · 1847
3Cited by10 opinions
- Howard v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1921
- McLaughlin v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
- Lee v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1921
- Davis v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
- Marshall v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.