United States v. Cooly
This text of 25 F. Cas. 623 (United States v. Cooly) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
(ttem con.) quashed the indictment, being of opinion that the indictment must charge the offence either to be the keep[709]*709ing of a common gaming-table, or must positively charge it to be the keeping of a faro-bank, not merely a gaming-table called a faro-bank.
Thruston, J., suggested that it would be better to charge it as the keeping of a faro-bank, the same being a common gaming-table. In a subsequent case against McCormick, at this term, for keeping “a certain public gaming-table called a faro-bank,” the indictment was quashed, on the authority of Cooly's case.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
25 F. Cas. 623, 4 D.C. 707, 4 Cranch 707, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-cooly-circtddc-1836.