Court Opinion

ID: 5616526
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-11 04:19:49.30422+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:37:16.115887
License: Public Domain

Broyles, C. J.
(After stating the foregoing facts.) In our opinion the slot machine as operated by the defendant was a gambling device, within the meaning 'of the statute. Meyer v. State, 112 Ga. 20 (37 S. E. 96, 51 L. R. A. 496, 81 Am. St. Rep. 17), and authorities cited; Alexander v. Atlanta, 13 Ga. App. 354 (79 S. E. 177).

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.