Jacobs v. State
| Decision Date | 23 October 1911 |
| Citation | 141 S.W. 489 |
| Parties | JACOBS v. STATE. |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Garland County; C. T. Catham, Judge.
W. S. Jacobs was convicted on five separate indictments for exhibiting gambling devices, and he appeals. Affirmed.
One indictment charged him with exhibiting a gambling device commonly called Klondike; another with exhibiting a gambling device commonly called a crap table; another with exhibiting a gambling device commonly called roulette; the fourth with exhibiting a gambling device commonly called faro bank; and the fifth charged him with exhibiting a device commonly called bird cage. He pleaded guilty to the indictment which charged him with having exhibited the gambling device known as Klondike, and a judgment of conviction was rendered upon the plea. Upon the trial of each of the other indictments, respectively, charging the setting up and exhibiting of a crap table, roulette wheel, faro bank, and bird cage, respectively, a plea of former conviction based upon said judgment was interposed as a bar to the prosecution. It was agreed that the several devices were exhibited at the same time and place as the device known as Klondike, upon trial for exhibition of which a judgment of conviction had been rendered, and the indictment and judgment of conviction were also read in evidence. The four cases were heard by the court upon the indictments, the plea of former conviction, the agreement of counsel, and the record in said case in which the plea of guilty was entered. The plea of former conviction was overruled, and a fine of $100 and costs was assessed in each case. From the judgments, this appeal comes.
Rector & Sawyer, for appellant. Hal L. Norwood, Atty. Gen., and Wm. H. Rector, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
KIRBY, J. (after stating the facts as above).
Each of the indictments charges appellant with keeping and exhibiting a certain gambling device, naming it, in violation of section 1732 of Kirby's Digest, which reads as follows: "Every person who shall set up, keep or exhibit any gaming table or gambling device, commonly called A. B. C., O. E., roulette, rouge et noir, or any faro bank, or any other gaming table or gambling device, or bank of the like or similar kind, or of any other description, although not herein named, be the name or denomination what it may, adapted, devised or designed for the purpose of playing any game of chance, at which any money or property may be won or lost, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not less than one hundred dollars, and may be imprisoned any length of time, not less than 30 days nor more than one year."
It is contended by appellant that, having set up and exhibited each and all of the gambling devices, with the exhibition of which he was separately charged in the different indictments at the same time and place, he was guilty of but one offense, and, having pleaded guilty and been convicted under one of said indictments, that the court erred in denying his plea of former conviction as a bar to his prosecution upon the other charges.
The first seven sections of the statute against gaming (sections 1732-1738, Kirby's Digest) relate exclusively to the banking games, whether called by the names specified or by any new name or device; and the court construing the fourth section (1735), which denounces a penalty against the owner or occupant of any house, who "shall knowingly permit or suffer any of the before mentioned tables, games or banks to be carried or exhibited in their house," etc., held: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial