Commonwealth v. Wills
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 13. — PROSECUTION AGAINST JAMES WILLS POR PER- * MITTING A MINOR TO PLAY ON A BILLIARD TABLE.— Appeal from Clark Circuit Court. J. M. Benton, Circuit Judge. Defendant acquitted and Commonwealth appeals. We submit that the jury are not required to believe that at the time of the alleged playing the owner of the table must have known that the player was under 21 years of age.
Read the full summary
Case 13. — PROSECUTION AGAINST JAMES WILLS POR PER- * MITTING A MINOR TO PLAY ON A BILLIARD TABLE.— Appeal from Clark Circuit Court. J. M. Benton, Circuit Judge. Defendant acquitted and Commonwealth appeals. We submit that the jury are not required to believe that at the time of the alleged playing the owner of the table must have known that the player was under 21 years of age. The law makes it incumbent on the owner to know that those offering to play, and playing, are laboring under no disability. (Ulrich v. Commonwealth, 6 Bush, 400.)
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Judge Paynter
Affirming.
The indictment in this case was based upon sec. 1972, Ky. Stats. 1903, which reads as follows: “If any person, being the owner or controller of the tables called 'pigeon-hole tables,’ or any table similar thereto, or any billiard table, shall knowingly suffer or permit, for compensation or reward, any minor under the age of twenty-one years, without the written permission of the parent or guardian *104of said minor, to play any game thereon, either by betting or not betting.” The lower court, among other instructions, gave the following: “The phrase ‘knowingly…
2Cited by3 opinions
- DeZarn v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1922
- Willingham v. PanickCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1947
- Justice v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1926