Conklin v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
The opinion states the case.
1Opinion of the Court
DAVIDSON, Judge.
This is an appeal from a conviction for keeping and exhibiting a device for the purpose of gaming, as denounced by Art. 619, P. C.; the punishment, confinement in the State penitentiary for a term of two years.
The charging part of the indictment upon which the conviction was predicated reads as follows: “that E. F. Conklin, onor about the 12th day of March, A. D., 1941, in said County and State, did directly and through his agent, H. E. Rigby, unlawfully keep and exhibit a device for the purpose of gaming.”
Appellafit, by a motion to quash, challenged the sufficiency of the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Kennedy v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1919
- Monroe v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1942
- Parker v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1938
- Stanford v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1925
- Stearnes v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1858
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Haecker v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1978
- Terry v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1971
- State v. RossCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2019
- Daniels v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1984
- Womble v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1957
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.