Mastoras v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Mastoras v. State

180 So. 115, 235 Ala. 519, 1938 Ala. LEXIS 272

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedMarch 24, 1938

Docket7 Div. 503.

StatusPublished

Cited by16 cases

This text of 180 So. 115 (Mastoras v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mastoras v. State, 180 So. 115, 235 Ala. 519, 1938 Ala. LEXIS 272 (Ala. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The writ of certiorari is denied, but we do not wish to be understood as approving the statement in the opinion of the Court of Appeals, used arguendo, that a “faro table” or “roulette table” is not a “contrivance, appliance, or invention” within the condemnation of the Act of July 25, 1931, Acts 1931, p. 806.

If the count of the indictment had averred: “The Grand Jury of said County charges that before the finding of this indict *520 ment George Mastoras, whose name is unknown to the Grand Jury otherwise than as stated, did possess, keep, own, set up, operate, or conduct, or did permit to be set up, operated, or conducted, a gambling contrivance, appliance or invention, to wit, a faro table, contrary to law,” it would have been free of demurrable defects.

Writ of certiorari denied.

ANDERSON, C. J., and BROWN, FOSTER, and KNIGHT, Jj., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI