Lyman v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Polk Circuit Court; Tames S. Steel, Judge; 1. There is no such offense as “running a gambling house.’’ If the indictment charges any offense, it charges two distinct and separate offenses. Kirby’s Dig., § § 1732-5; 35 Ark. 62. 2. The venue was not proved. 8 Ark. 400; 13 Id. 105; 56 Id. 226; 58 Id. 390. 3. The remarks of the prosecuting attorney were prejudicial. The fact that defendant did not testify raised no presumption against him.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Polk Circuit Court; Tames S. Steel, Judge; 1. There is no such offense as “running a gambling house.’’ If the indictment charges any offense, it charges two distinct and separate offenses. Kirby’s Dig., § § 1732-5; 35 Ark. 62. 2. The venue was not proved. 8 Ark. 400; 13 Id. 105; 56 Id. 226; 58 Id. 390. 3. The remarks of the prosecuting attorney were prejudicial. The fact that defendant did not testify raised no presumption against him. Kirby’s Dig., § 3088. 1. All the incompetent testimony was brought out by defendant on cross examination and he cannot complain. 58 Ark. 513; 66…
1Opinion of the CourtFrauenthal, J.
At the October term, 1907, of the Polk Circuit Court the grand jury of Polk County returned an indictment against the defendant, Ed Lyman, charging him with the offense of “running a gambling house.” At the October term, 1908, of said circuit court the defendant pleaded not guilty to said indictment; and thereupon he was tried by a jury, and they returned a verdict of guilty, and assessed a fine of three hundred and fifty dollars against the defendant.
The evidence tended to prove that the defendant was conducting a business on Sherman Avenue in the city of Mena, Arkansas, and across the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Lacefield v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1879
- Wilder v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1874
- Johnson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1880
- Forehand v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1890
- State v. CulbreathSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1902
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Bell v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- Cranford v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1917
- Ware v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1920
- Strum v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1925
- St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. TaylorSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1975
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.