Jarrell v. State
Decision Date | 03 January 1939 |
Citation | 135 Fla. 736,185 So. 873 |
Parties | JARRELL v. STATE. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Rehearing Denied Feb. 6, 1939.
Error to Circuit Court, Seminole County; M. B. Smith, Judge.
Joseph W. Jarrell was convicted of violating statute forbidding lotteries, and he brings error.
Affirmed.
George A. DeCottes, of Sanford, for appellant.
George Couper Gibbs, Atty. Gen., Tyrus A. Norwood, Asst. Atty. Gen and Lloyd F. Boyle, Asst. State Atty., of Sandford, for the State.
This writ of error was taken to a judgment of conviction and sentence to one year's imprisonment in the State Penitentiary on an indictment charging in six counts violations of the statute forbidding lotteries.
On motion to quash, the fifth count was eliminated and trial was had on the remaining five counts and a plea of not guilty after a motion for a bill of particulars as to each count had been denied. It does not appear that the order denying the bill of particulars was excepted to.
The first count charged 'that Joseph W. Jarrell of the County of Seminole and State of Florida, on the 17th day of November, in the year of our Lord One Thousand Nine Hundred and Thirty-seven, in the County and State aforesaid, and at divers times between September 29th, 1937, and November 17th 1937, did conduct a lottery for money and by means of a lottery did dispose of money, the aforesaid lottery being commonly known as Cuba, a further description of said lottery being to the Grand Jurors unknown; contrary to the form of the Statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the State of Florida.'
Other counts differed only in charging that the defendant
'did set up and promote a lottery for money, the aforesaid lottery being commonly known as Cuba, a further description of said lottery being to the Grand Jurors unknown;
'did by means of a certain lottery, dispose of money, the aforesaid lottery being commonly known as Cuba, a further description of said lottery being to the Grand Jurors unknown;
'did transmit certain lottery tickets and coupons representing an interest in a lottery for money yet to be played, the aforesaid lottery being commonly known as Cuba, a further description of said lottery being to the Grand Jurors unknown;
'did sell lottery tickets and coupons representing an interest in a lottery for money yet to be played, the aforesaid lottery being commonly known as Cuba, a further description of said lottery being to the Grand Jurors unknown;'
Grounds of the motion to quash are numerous and are adapted to each count. In substance they are that each count is vague, indefinite and uncertain; charges no offense against the laws of Florida; does not sufficiently apprize the defendant of the nature of the accusation preferred against him; charges no offense punishable by law under section 23, Article 3 of the Constitution, prohibiting lotteries in the state of Florida; is bad for duplicity in that it purports to charge two offenses; fails to charge the manner, means or extent in which defendant conducted a lottery; alleges conclusions as to certain material elements of the offense purported to be charged, and alleges no facts from which said conclusions could be drawn; does not properly and sufficiently allege the means employed or the date or place of the commission of the offense sought to be charged; is so framed that it in no way protects the defendant from a second prosecution for the same offense; is so framed that it cannot be determined whether it purports to charge a misdemeanor or a felony.
The motion for bill of particulars as to each of the five remaining counts of the information and the specifications as to the first count are as follows:
Specifications as to other counts are similarly stated to refer to the counts severally.
Section 23, Article 3 of the Florida Constitution is as follows:
'Lotteries are hereby prohibited in this State.'
Section 7667(5509), C.G.L., is as follows:
Section 7669(5511), C.G.L., provides:
'Whoever sets up, promotes or plays at any game of chance by lot or with dice, cards, numbers, hazard or any other gambling device whatever for, or for the disposal of money or other thing of value or under the pretext of a sale, gift or delivery thereof, or for any right, share or interest therein, shall be fined not exceeding one hundred dollars, or be imprisoned not exceeding three months.'
Counsel for plaintiff in error contends in effect that no penal offense pertaining to any aspect of a lottery, such as is prohibited by the constitution, is properly charged in any of the counts; that it cannot be determined from the language of any of the counts whether the offense sought to be charged is a felony under section 7667, C.G.L., or a misdemeanor under section 7669, C.G.L.; that each count is vague and indefinite and does not sufficiently apprise the defendant of the nature of the charge against him, or protect him from prosecution twice for the same offense.
The above quoted statutes were enacted as sections 1 and 3 of Chapter 4373, Acts of 1895, the title to the Chapter being 'An Act to Prohibit Lotteries and Games of Chance, and to Prescribe Penalties Therefor.' The purpose of Chapter 4373 is to effectuate the provision of the constitution that: 'Lotteries are hereby prohibited in this State'; and the courts should interpret and apply the statute in prosecutions under it so as to enforce the command of the constitution, when such enforcement does not violate any other provision of the constitution. In this prosecution the defendant has a constitutional right to demand that an information against him shall be...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Greater Loretta Imp. Ass'n v. State ex rel. Boone
...Public Policy,' Sections 1 through 6 which made it an offense to conduct any lottery at any place at any time. In Jarrell v. State, 135 Fla. 736, 743, 185 So. 873, 877 (1939) this Court said that our statutes were drafted '(T)o effectuate the provision of the constitution that: 'Lotteries a......
-
Bradenton Group, Inc. v. Department of Legal Affairs, State of Fla.
...the constitutional and the statutory references to lotteries alike. The court would later reinforce this synonymy in Jarrell v. State, 135 Fla. 736, 185 So. 873 (1939), when it explained that the legislative purpose of the lottery statute was "to effectuate the provision of the constitution......
-
Peel v. State
...trial court's partial denial of his motion for bill of particulars, he is in no position to complain to this Court. Jarrell v. State, 1939, 135 Fla. 736, 185 So. 873, 879. The next two points presented by appellant in his brief and on oral argument concern his right to discovery and inspect......
-
Fuller v. State
...the case; (c) because of uncertainty of the jury's verdict. Therefore our holdings in Strachaan v. State, D'Alessandro v. State, and Jarrell v. State, supra, cited by counsel for appellants for a reversal are not controlling nor applicable in the case at bar because a different set of facts......