Winehart v. State
This text of 6 Ind. 30 (Winehart v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Indictment for keeping a gaming house. Conviction and fine in the Circuit Court.
The question is on the weight of evidence. It is proved, that the defendant kept a grocery store, in which he sold beer, cigars, &c.; and two witnesses testified that-they had often played cards in an adjoining room in the house, for cigars, beer, &c.; that the defendant did not know it was wrong to permit such acts in his house, and whenever he learned it was so, he forbade them. Such prohibition is sometimes a trick. Besides, his ignorance of the law did not excuse him. We think a jury might infer the guilt of the defendant from the evidence. See McAlpin v. The State, 3 Ind. R. 567.— The State v. Staker, id. 570.
The judgment is affirmed with costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
6 Ind. 30, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/winehart-v-state-ind-1854.