Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

STATE v. MARTIN.

An indictment charging that the respondent "did unlawfully make and put up a pretended lottery called policy" sufficiently describes the offence.

CLARK, J.

"In a complaint or indictment in any case arising under the preceding sections, a lottery may be described as a pretended lottery, which shall be sufficient, whatever the proof may be; and it shall not be necessary to allege or prove, upon trial, who is the owner of the property, nor who manages, conducts, draws the lottery, or participates therein." P. S., c. 270, s. 4. The game of policy being a lottery, the indictment sets forth all that is required under the statute. It charges the defendant with an offence in the words of the statute, and describes to him the particular kind of a lottery he is charged with making and putting up. State v. Follet, 6 N.H. 53; State v. Clarke, 33 N.H. 329; State v. Moore, 63 N.H. 9; Commonwealth v. Wright, 137 Mass. 250; Commonwealth v. Sullivan, 146 Mass. 142.

Motion denied.

All concurred.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

STATE v. MARTIN
(Jun 1, 1896)