In re Pierotti
Nevada Supreme Court
Original proceeding. Application of Louis Pierotti for a writ of habeas corpus. Sections 6494 and 6495 of the Revised Laws.do not embrace or include the device or slot machine mentioned in the complaint. The acts and things which petitioner is charged with having committed are not prohibited under the laws of the State of Nevada, but are specifically excluded from the operation of the law denouncing and making criminal the use of slot machines.
Read the full summary
Original proceeding. Application of Louis Pierotti for a writ of habeas corpus. Sections 6494 and 6495 of the Revised Laws.do not embrace or include the device or slot machine mentioned in the complaint. The acts and things which petitioner is charged with having committed are not prohibited under the laws of the State of Nevada, but are specifically excluded from the operation of the law denouncing and making criminal the use of slot machines. Stats. 1915, p. 462. The word “lottery,” as used in section 24, article 4, Constitution of Nevada, and section 6494 of the Revised Laws, does nót…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Sanders, J.:
The thing or device denominated in the complaint “a lottery” is a “nickel-in-the-slot machine.” The act complained of is that the petitioner wilfully and unlawfully set up a nickel-in-the-slot machine in his place of business at 128 Commercial Row, in the city of Reno, Nevada.
The offense charged, with the word “lottery” entirely removed therefrom, would be a public nuisance.
Every place wherein any gambling game or device is kept, or any article, apparatus, or device useful therefor is kept, “shall be a public nuisance.” Rev. Laws, 6561.
1. Nickel-in-the-slot machines…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Temple v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1881
- Phalen v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1850
- Loiseau v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1896
- People v. ReillyMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
- Scott v. CourtneyNevada Supreme Court · 1872
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Harris v. Missouri Gaming CommissionSupreme Court of Missouri · 1994
- West Indies v. First Nat. Bank of NevadaNevada Supreme Court · 1950
- Dudding v. Automatic Gas Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1946
- Lee v. City of MiamiSupreme Court of Florida · 1935
- Oneida County Fair Board v. SmylieIdaho Supreme Court · 1963
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.