State v. Lasselle

• Decision Date: 11 June 1923
• Docket Number: 26021
• Citation: 154 La. 168,97 So. 389
• Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE v. LASSELLE et al

97 So. 389

154 La. 168

STATE v. LASSELLE et al

No. 26021

Supreme Court of Louisiana

June 11, 1923

Appeal from Criminal District Court, Parish of Orleans; N. E Humphrey, Judge.

C Lasselle and others were convicted of operating a lottery and they appeal.

Affirmed.

Arthur Landry, of New Orleans, for appellants.

A. V. Coco, Atty. Gen., Robert H. Marr, Dist. Atty., of New Orleans (T. S. Walmsley, of New Orleans, of counsel), for the State.

DAWKINS J. O'NIELL, C. J.

OPINION

DAWKINS, J.

Defendants were indicted and convicted of the crime of operating a lottery; and, as the basis of this appeal, rely upon bills of exception to the overruling of motions for a new trial and in arrest of judgment.

Opinion.

The same grounds were urged in both motions, and we shall consider them together. They are:

1. That Act No. 169 of 1894 applies to the operation of a lottery throughout the state, and not to one conducted alone in the parish of Orleans;

2 and 3. That the judgment of conviction was contrary to the law and the evidence; and,

4. That a lottery cannot exist where the game is dependent upon the skill of the player.

The first section of the statute declares:

"That whoever shall establish, set up, draw or run a lottery in this state, for himself or for others, as an individual, partner, shareholder, officer, manager, or agent, shall, upon conviction, be imprisoned, with or without hard labor, not more than one year and fined not exceeding one thousand dollars one-half of such fine to go to the informer securing the conviction, and the other half to go to the city of New Orleans, or parish in which the offense is committed."

There is no doubt but that the evil intended to be reached by Act No. 169 of 1894, as demonstrated by the contemporaneous political history of the state, was a lottery such as was conducted by the famous Louisiana Lottery Company. However, the statute does not define the word "lottery," and we are bound to look elsewhere for its meaning. It seems to have been used in the ordinary sense, as defined by lexicographers and the common law. As defined by Webster's New International Dictionary, it means:

"A scheme for the distribution of prizes by lot or chance; especially a scheme by which one or more are distributed by chance among persons who have paid or promised a consideration for a chance to win them, usually as determined by the numbers on tickets as drawn from a lottery wheel."

Bishop on Statutory Crimes, § 952:

"Lottery is any scheme whereby one, on paying money or other valuable thing to another, becomes entitled to receive from him such a return in value or nothing, as some formula of chance may determine."

See, also, City of Shreveport v. Kahn, 136 La. 371, 67 So. 35, and authorities cited therein.

Hence from these definitions, it would seem that any scheme for the distribution of a prize or prizes among those who have paid for the privilege of betting, dependent upon chance, is a lottery. ...