Davis v. State
Indiana Supreme Court
From the Bartholomew Circuit Court.
1Opinion of the CourtZollars, C. J.
Appellant contends that the indictment is bad for duplicity, and that, therefore, the court below erred in overruling the motion to quash. The prosecution is under section 2079, B. S. 1881, which provides that whoever keeps .a building, etc., to be used or occupied for gaming, or knowingly permits the same to be used or occupied for gaming, or whoever, being the owner of any building, etc., rents the same •to be used or occupied for gaming, shall be fined not more .than five hundred nor less than ten dollars.
The indictment is in one count. That portion which charges •and describes the offence…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Knopf v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
- State v. MyersSupreme Court of Iowa · 1860
- Clifford v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1871
- State v. CoosterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1860
- State v. FletcherSupreme Court of Missouri · 1853
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Howard v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1921
- Hobbs v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1893
- Fahnestock v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
- Mergentheim v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
- Lee v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1921
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.