
    Grats Inman v. The State.
    No. 3028.
    Decided February 22, 1905.
    Gaining—Poker
    Where the evidence showed that the defendant played at a game of cai;ds known as “Poker,” at a schoolhouse, the testimony supports the indictment charging defendant with unlawfully playing at a game with cards not at a private residence.
    
      Appeal from the County Court of Hale. Tried below before Hon. W. C. Mathes.
    Appeal from a conviction of unlawfully playing at a game of cards not a private residence; penalty, a fine of $10.
    The opinion states the case.
    No brief for appellant.
    
      Eoivard Martin, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.
   BROOKS, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of gaming, and fined $10. Appellant insists that the evidence is not sufficient to support the information, charging the “unlawful playing of a game with cards” not at a private residence. The only witness introduced on the trial testified, “We all met around and decided to have some fun and rounded up at the schoolhouse, and had a little game of poker.” Poker is defined to be a game with cards—see Webster Dictionary. We think this testimony supports the allegations of the indictment. The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed,.  