Smith v. Commonwealth

11 Ky. Op. 224, 3 Ky. L. Rptr. 248, 1881 Ky. LEXIS 249
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Smith v. Commonwealth. Read the opinion of the Court — 11 Ky. Op. 774
Court of Appeals of Kentucky·Decided September 15, 1881·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Judge Hargis :

The indictment accuses the appellants of the offense of unlawfully permitting a game of chance on premises occupied by [225]*225them and under their control, committed by knowingly permitting pools to be sold on the Warren county Fair Grounds, which were in their occupation as directors and managers of the Agricultural and Mechanical Association of that county.

Nat A- Porter, Rodes & Little, for appellants. John M. Porter, for appellee.

It has been held that pool selling was neither a wager nor a game. Check v. Commonwealth, 79 Ky. 359. Therefore the acts alleged did not constitute the offense with which the appellants were charged.

Wherefore the judgment is reversed.

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

Smith v. Commonwealth, 11 Ky. Op. 224, 3 Ky. L. Rptr. 248, 1881 Ky. LEXIS 249 (Ky. Ct. App. 1881).

11 Ky. Op. 224 (Smith v. Commonwealth) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cheek v. Commonwealth
79 Ky. 359 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1881)