State v. Scaggs

Decision Date31 October 1862
Citation33 Mo. 92
PartiesTHE STATE OF MISSOURI, Appellant, v. ABRAHAM SCAGGS, Respondent.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court.

S. Voullaire, for appellant.

I. The gist of the offense being described by the words of the statute, the indictment is therefore correct, as it follows the very language of the law. (See 1 R. C. 1855, p. 626-7; State v. Fulton et al., 19 Mo. 680 and following.)

II. If the Legislature intended that there should be a betting, a playing, that these cards should be dealt out and that somebody should have bet, all of this is a using of the cards for the purpose of gaming, and the words used are properly employed in the indictment without any further description of the manner in which the cards were employed; and the case being a simple misdemeanor, the law does not require the same minuteness as in felony cases, and so the Supreme Court has already said. (See State v. Nelson, 19 Mo. 393 and following.)

Thomas & Hagan, for respondent.

I. The Circuit Court committed no error in quashing the indictment.

II. The indictment should have specified how defendant violated the law. The words of the statute are not always sufficient in an indictment. (29 Mo. 475.)

BAY, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

At the June term, 1860, of the Jefferson Circuit Court the defendant was indicted for permitting a gambling device to be used for the purpose of gaming in a house occupied by him.

The indictment is founded on the 18th section of article 8 of our statute relating to crimes and punishments, and is as follows:

“The grand jurors of the State of Missouri now here in court duly empaneled, sworn and charged to inquire within and for the body of the county of Jefferson, upon their oaths present, that Abraham Scaggs, late of said county, on the sixteenth day of June, eighteen hundred and sixty, with force and arms, at and in the county of Jefferson aforesaid, unlawfully did permit a certain gambling device called a pack of cards, being a gambling device adapted, used and designed for the purpose of playing games of chance for money or property, against the peace and dignity of the State of Missouri.”

The defendant appeared and moved to quash the indictment upon the ground that it did not aver that any person or persons bet or gambled upon such device. The court sustained the motion, and the circuit attorney brings the case here by appeal.

The only question to be determined is as to the sufficiency of the indictment....

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • State v. Brown
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • June 6, 1925
    ... ... Ellis, 4 Mo. 474; ... Eubanks v. The State, 5 Mo. 450; The ... State v. Mitchell, 6 Mo. 147; State v. Bates, ... 10 Mo. 166; State v. Ames, 10 Mo. 743; State v ... Fletcher, 18 Mo. 425; State v. Herryford, 19 ... Mo. 377; State v. Fulton, 19 Mo. 680; State v ... Scaggs, 33 Mo. 92; The State v. Dyson, 39 ... Mo.App. 297; The State v. Mosby, 53 Mo.App. 571; ... The State v. Mohr, 55 Mo.App. 325; State v ... Etchman, 184 Mo. 193, 83 S.W. 978; State v ... Rosenblatt, 185 Mo. 114, 83 S.W. 975; State v ... Hall, 228 Mo. 456, 128 S.W. 745; State v ... ...
  • State v. Gilmore
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • May 20, 1889
    ...3 Mo. 114; State v. Ellis, 4 Mo. 474; Eubanks v. State, 5 Mo. 450; State v. Bates, 10 Mo. 166; State v. Herryford, 19 Mo. 377; State v. Scaggs, 33 Mo. 92. But we have to find a case prosecuted under the law contained in section 1547, which has been on the statute book in terms substantially......
  • State v. Hogle
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • May 8, 1911
    ...concisely presents the charge under the statutes. R. S. 1909, sec. 4753; State v. Dyson, 39 Mo.App. 297; State v. Lee, 228 Mo. 456; State v. Scaggs, 33 Mo. 92; State v. Locket, 188 Mo. 415. (2) The information sufficient against the attack "that it should have described the building" and th......
  • City of Moberly v. Deskin
    • United States
    • Kansas Court of Appeals
    • April 7, 1913
    ...and used in unlawful gaming. Thus a pack of cards is held to be a gaming device when employed in gambling (State v. Mohr, supra; State v. Scaggs, 33 Mo. 92; State Herryford, 19 Mo. 377), though, as is well known, cards are in general use as a means of recreation and innocent amusement. Amon......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT