History
  • No items yet
midpage
Hazen v. State
18 Fla. 184
Fla.
1881
Check Treatment
Mr. Justice VanValkenburgh

delivered the opinion of the court.

These three cases are here upon writs of error, the defendants having been severally indicted under the gaming law of 1839 (Thomp. Dig., 500, 1,) for keeping a keno table, *185the errors assigned in each individual case being the same as assigned in the case of “ The State of Florida vs. William C. Overby,” decided at this term of this court. They all justified under the one license issued to the said William C. Overby, and numbered 774.

The evidence shows that they were copartners of the said Overby, and that they all occupied the same room in the City of Jacksonville, each having a different table. The law under which they were severally indicted provides that a license should be taken out for each table. We have,. however, held that the law of 1839 was amended by the law of 1879 so as to legalize the playing of “keno,” and that the person or persons running such game must procure a license and pay a license tax. If they do not so procure a license they are guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon com viction, should be punished by a fine, as provided in §12 of Chapter 3099, Laws of 1879.

For the reasons assigned in the case of The State vs. Overby these three several judgments must be arrested, and such is the order of this court.

Case Details

Case Name: Hazen v. State
Court Name: Supreme Court of Florida
Date Published: Jan 15, 1881
Citation: 18 Fla. 184
Court Abbreviation: Fla.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.