184 A. 911 (Md. 1936), 30, Miggins v. State

Docket Nº:30.
Citation:184 A. 911, 170 Md. 454
Party Name:MIGGINS v. STATE.
Attorney:Calvert K. Hartle, of Hagerstown, for appellant. Herbert R. O'Conor, Atty. Gen., Charles T. LeViness, III, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Martin L. Ingram, State's Atty., of Hagerstown, for the State.
Judge Panel:Argued before BOND, C.J., and OFFUTT, SLOAN, MITCHELL, SHEHAN, and JOHNSON, JJ.
Case Date:May 20, 1936
Court:Court of Appeals of Maryland
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 911

184 A. 911 (Md. 1936)

170 Md. 454

MIGGINS

v.

STATE.

No. 30.

Court of Appeals of Maryland

May 20, 1936

Appeal from Circuit Court, Washington County; Frank G. Wagaman, Judge.

Harry D. Miggins was convicted of establishing, using, keeping, and occupying a certain house, building, grounds, and place, and a portion of a certain house, building, grounds, and place within the state of Maryland for the purpose of making, selling, and buying books and pools therein and thereon, on the result of any race, contest, and contingency, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

Page 912

Argued before BOND, C.J., and OFFUTT, SLOAN, MITCHELL, SHEHAN, and JOHNSON, JJ.

Calvert K. Hartle, of Hagerstown, for appellant.

Herbert R. O'Conor, Atty. Gen., Charles T. LeViness, III, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Martin L. Ingram, State's Atty., of Hagerstown, for the State.

OFFUTT, Judge.

The grand jury for the February term, 1936, for Washington county indicted Harry D. Miggins, the appellant, for establishing, using, keeping, and occupying a certain "house, building, grounds and place, and a portion of a certain house, building, grounds and place, within the state of Maryland, situate on the second floor of the Arcade building on West Washington street, in Hagerstown, Washington county, Maryland, for the purpose of making, selling and buying books and pools therein and thereon upon the result of any race, contest and contingency." To that indictment Miggins demurred. The demurrer was overruled, he then confessed a plea of guilty, sentence was imposed, and judgment entered. The appeal is from that judgment.

The effect of the appellant's plea of guilty was to waive proof of any facts alleged in the indictment, but not to waive objection to it on the ground that the facts alleged did not constitute an indictable offense, nor to waive objection to the jurisdiction of the court to try him under it. 16 C.J. 402 et seq. Those questions may therefore be considered on this appeal.

The offense charged in the indictment is defined in Code, art. 27, § 247, which reads in part as follows: "It shall not be lawful for any person or persons, or association of persons, or for any corporation within the State of Maryland, to bet, wage or gamble in any manner, or by any means, or to make or sell a book or pool on the result of any trotting, pacing or running race of horses or other beasts, or race, contest or contingency of any kind, or to establish, keep, rent, use or occupy or knowingly suffer to be used, kept or rented or occupied, any house, building, vessel, grounds or place, or portion of any house, building, vessel, grounds, or place, on land or water, within the State of Maryland, for the purpose of betting, wagering or gambling in any manner, or by any means, or...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP