Winford v. State

Hall, Judge.

The defendant contends that the State’s evidence was insufficient to prove her guilty of the crime of which she was accused. The accusation alleged that the defendant “did unlawfully keep, maintain, employ and carry on a certain scheme and device for the hazarding of money . . . known as and called ‘Bolita.’ ” By Code § 26-6502 this is made a crime.

There was testimony of the following facts: Officers had had the defendant’s house under surveillance and noticed an unusual amount of traffic and some people going in who had been involved in Bolita. Officers procured a warrant and…