WM. HAZEN, PL'F IN ERROR,
v.
THE STATE, DFT. IN ERROR; C. J. BLADE, PL'F IN ERROR, VS. THE STATE, DFT. IN ERROR; HENRY BOHLEN, PL'F IN ERROR, VS. THE STATE, DFT. IN ERROR
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court reversed convictions for keeping a keno table, finding that the defendants were justified by a single license issued to a partner, despite the law requiring a license per table. The court referenced a prior decision in a similar case.
No, the defendants' convictions were improperly obtained. The court found that the prior decision in State vs. Overby, which addressed similar issues, dictated the outcome.
“They all justified under the one license issued to the said William C. Overby, and numbered 774.”
Establishes the defendants' defense.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThree defendants were indicted for keeping a keno table under the gaming law of 1839. They claimed justification under a single license issued to a co…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse License Tax cases and more on FLexlaw
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.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Greater Loretta Improvement Ass'n v. State ex rel. Arthur T. Boone, 234 So. 2d 665 (Fla. 1970)…alized this game of ‘keno’ and made it, by the license tax imposed, a source of revenue to the State * * No constitutional arguments were presented. Overby’s conviction was set aside, as were the convictions of three other licensees. Hazen v. State, 18 Fla. 184 (1881). The correctness of this decision was verified by the Legislature in the same year, when it expressly repealed all laws in conflict with its licensing statute for gambling. Ch. 3277, Acts of Florida, 1881. In 1885, four years after Overby,…