Chavannah v. State
Supreme Court of Alabama
From the City Court of Mobile. Tried before the Hon. C. F. Moulton. The indictment in this case charged that, before the finding thereof, Hugh Chavannah “ set up, or was concerned in setting up or carrying on a lottery, without the legislative authority of this State.”
Read the full summary
From the City Court of Mobile. Tried before the Hon. C. F. Moulton. The indictment in this case charged that, before the finding thereof, Hugh Chavannah “ set up, or was concerned in setting up or carrying on a lottery, without the legislative authority of this State.” “ On the trial,” as the bill of exceptions states, “ the State proved that the defendant conducted and carried on a game described as follows : There are three pieces of timber fastened together at the top, and spreading out at the bottom, so as to stand upright. The piece in front is perpendicular, and has a pivot inserted in…
1Opinion of the CourtPeters, C. J.
— The only question raised on this indictment is, whether the game represented by the evidence is a lottery, “ or device of the like kind.” If it is a lottery, it falls under the denunciation of our statute, and the accused was properly convicted. If it is otherwise, he should have been acquitted and discharged. The transaction represented ih the *398evidence is evidently a game of chance. The good or bad fortune of the party making the risk did not depend for success upon any skill of the player in the control of the event which entitled him to win. That depended wholly upon lot or chance. Lot…
2Cited by19 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Evans v. Brotherhood of FriendsWashington Supreme Court · 1952
- Greater Loretta Imp. Ass'n v. State Ex Rel. BooneSupreme Court of Florida · 1970
- Meyer v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
- Loiseau v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1896
- Lynch v. RosenthalIndiana Supreme Court · 1896
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.