Horton v. State

8 Ark. 62

Opinion

Mr. Justice Scott

delivered the opinion of the Court.

In this case, the State having proceeded against the defendant for betting money, did not sustain the charge by proof that he bet property. To bet property, is a distinct offence under our statute. (Dig. p. 367, see. 8.) The court below ought to h,ave granted the motion for a new trial. Let the judgment be reversed, and the cause remanded.