Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

13 Ala. 602

Coleman v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 15, 1848

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1848-01-15

Before the Hon. S. Chapman. • The plaintiff in error was indicted, in the circuit court of Pickens county, for playing a game at cards. The indictment contains several counts — one for playing cards at a public place, another for playing cards at a place where spiritous liquors were retailed. There were other counts, not necessary to be noticed.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1848-01-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently April 1945

7 state decisions

2018481850186018701880189019001910192019301940decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

DARCr AN, J.

¶1The language of the statute on which this indictment is founded, is, “ if any person shall play at any tavern, or inn, or storehouse for retailing spiritous liquors, or house or place where spiritous liquors are retailed, or given away, or any public house or highway, or at any other public place, or at any outhouse where people resort, at any game or games, with cards, or dice, &c. such person, so offending, shall on conviction be fined, fyc.

¶2The object of this statute is, to prevent the vice of gaming at the places specified in it, in order to suppress its evil influence upon the public morals; and the only question is, was the gaming at a place prohibited by the statute ? A steamboat employed in carrying passengers and freight, is certainly a public place ; and if spiritous liquors are retailed at the bar of the boat, it would be nonsense to say it was not a place *604where spiritous liquors are retailed. The playing in this case, was at a place designed to be prohibited, and. by express words is prohibited by the statute. The charge of the court was therefore correct, and the judgment is affirmed.

/13/ala/602 · .json · Public domain