Cameron v. State
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Circuit Court of Pickens. Before the Hon. S. Chapman. This was an indictment’against the plaintiff in error, for card playing. By a bill of exceptions taken in the case, it appears, that the State proved by a witness, that the defendant played at a game of cards, with others, in an unoccupied house in the fown of Yienna, in said county, at least once, in the presence of the witness, and that persons did resort to said house, for the purpose of play.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of Pickens. Before the Hon. S. Chapman. This was an indictment’against the plaintiff in error, for card playing. By a bill of exceptions taken in the case, it appears, that the State proved by a witness, that the defendant played at a game of cards, with others, in an unoccupied house in the fown of Yienna, in said county, at least once, in the presence of the witness, and that persons did resort to said house, for the purpose of play. The defendant’s counsel thereupon asked the court to charge the jury, that playing once would not constitute the offence, charged in…
1Opinion of the CourtCollier, C. J.
The bill of exceptions, perhaps, does not raise the question as explicitly as it might have done, whether the house where the gaming is alledged to have taken place, was an “out-house where people resort,” within the meaning of the statute, on which the indictment is founded ?
The prayer for instructions is, “ that a playing once, would not constitute the offence, as charged in the indictment.” This instruction was properly refused; for the of-fence is complete by playing “ at a game with cards,” at the place designated, (Clay’s Dig. 432, § 8 ;) and to hold a repetition of the playing to be…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Johnson v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1923
- Swallow v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1852
- State v. MelvilleSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1877