Wilson v. State
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Collin. The appellant was convicted’ of playing cards for money at a public place. The indictment charged the offense to have been ■committed in a blacksmith shop, the property of One -Foster S. Young, thfe same then and there being a public place. There was some conflict in the testimony as to the ownership of the shop, and the court instructed the jury that it was necessary for the State to prove it as laid. Cravens, for appellant.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Collin. The appellant was convicted’ of playing cards for money at a public place. The indictment charged the offense to have been ■committed in a blacksmith shop, the property of One -Foster S. Young, thfe same then and there being a public place. There was some conflict in the testimony as to the ownership of the shop, and the court instructed the jury that it was necessary for the State to prove it as laid. Cravens, for appellant. The proof does not support the verdict. If there is a variance between the proof and the allegations in the indictment, the defendant must be…
1Opinion of the CourtLipscomb, J.
This is an appeal from a conviction and judgment for playing at a game of cards at a public place, in violation of the act of 1840 to suppress gambling. The case differs in nothing from the case of Prior v. The State, decided the present term, and on the doctrine of that case the judgment is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
2Cited by1 opinion
- Herrin v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1906