State v. Lee
Oregon Supreme Court
Appeal from Grant County. The respondents were indicted for the crime of dealing, playing and carrying on as proprietors a banking game played for money% The indictment charges that “ the said Gitt Lee, Ah Foy and Ah Gau, on the fourteenth day of February, A. D. 1877, in the county and state aforesaid, did willfully and unlawfully deal, play and carry on as proprietors thereof a banking game played for money; but of what name, is to the said grand jury unknown, said game…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Grant County. The respondents were indicted for the crime of dealing, playing and carrying on as proprietors a banking game played for money% The indictment charges that “ the said Gitt Lee, Ah Foy and Ah Gau, on the fourteenth day of February, A. D. 1877, in the county and state aforesaid, did willfully and unlawfully deal, play and carry on as proprietors thereof a banking game played for money; but of what name, is to the said grand jury unknown, said game being played with copper devices for money, as representatives of money and value.” Respondents demurred to the indictment…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Watson, J.:
The verdict in this case is founded on section 1 of the act of the legislative assembly of the state of Oregon, approved October 20, 1876, entitled “An act to prevent and punish gambling.” The section is in these words: “Section 1. Each and every one who shall deal, play, or carry on, open, or cause to be opened, or who shall conduct, either as owner, proprietor or employee, whether for hire or not, any game of faro, monte, roulette, rouge et noir, lansquenette, rondo, vingtun. (or twenty-one), poker, draw poker, brag, bluff, thaw or any other game played with *427cards,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. MannOregon Supreme Court · 1867
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. DuncanMontana Supreme Court · 1910
- United States v. FrodenbergDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1930