Legal Opinion
Brockett v. State
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided November 13, 1924No. 15779PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBroyles, C. J.
(After stating the foregoing facts.) In our opinion the slot machine as operated by the defendant was a gambling device, within the meaning 'of the statute. Meyer v. State, 112 Ga. 20 (37 S. E. 96, 51 L. R. A. 496, 81 Am. St. Rep. 17), and authorities cited; Alexander v. Atlanta, 13 Ga. App. 354 (79 S. E. 177).
Judgment affirmed.
Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Meyer v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
- Alexander v. City of AtlantaCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1913
3Cited by12 opinions
- Elder v. CampSupreme Court of Georgia · 1942
- Harvie v. Heise, SheriffSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1929
- Boyd v. Piggly Wiggly Southern, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1967
- Jenner v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1931
- Jorman v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1936
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.