City of Everett v. Simmons

Citations

• 86 Wash. 276
• 150 P. 414
• 1915 Wash. LEXIS 1201

Syllabus

<p>Gaming — Criminal Prosecution — Election — Instructions — Issues Not Presented. Under a general information charging gambling, which admitted of proof of guilt either as owner, employee, or one who played in the game, proof of the accused’s direct personal participation in the game in a building leased by him is in the nature of an election; and upon the defense of an alibi, it is error to instruct the jury that they may convict if the accused did conduct or carry on the game “by himself or through any other person;” since there was no issue presented as to the accused’s constructive participation and no opportunity to meet such charge.</p> <p>Same — Criminal Prosecutions —• Evidence — Sueeiciency. Evidence of a witness that he played poker in defendant’s pool room but did not remember seeing defendant present at the time, is insufficient to support a conviction of gambling; as it is as consistent with innocence as guilt.</p> <p>Criminal Law — Trial — Argumentative Instructions. Upon a prosecution for gambling, supported by evidence of hired detectives, a requested instruction is properly refused as argumentative, where it directs greater care by the jury in weighing the testimony of persons who are interested because of the natural and unavoidable tendency and bias of mind of such persons to construe everything against the accused and disregard everything not supporting their preconceived opinions.</p>