Pennsylvania State Case Law - Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Vs Walter Watkins, Commonwealth V. Matos, Commonwealth V. Pullis (Paperback)

Chapters: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Vs Walter Watkins, Commonwealth V. Matos, Commonwealth V. Pullis. Source: Wikipedia. Pages: 19. Not illustrated. Free updates online. Purchase includes a free trial membership in the publisher's book club where you can select from more than a million books without charge. Excerpt: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania vs Walter Watkins was a Pennsylvania court case wherein a Columbia County Court ruled that poker was a game of skill not luck, thus not illegal gambling per the state statutes. Later, On April 2, 2010, a Pennsylvania Superior Court overturned the ruling declaring poker to be a game of luck.. In December 2008, Walter Watkins and Diane Dent were charged with 20 counts of violating state statutes against gambling. Pennsylvania law alleged that the defendants "unlawfully allowed persons to collect and assemble for the purpose of unlawful gambling" and "unlawfully solicit or invite any person to visit any unlawful gambling place for the purpose of gambling." Walter Watkins was hosting poker games in his garage, and Diane Dent was serving the role of dealer. The house did not take rake, but players were expected to tip the dealer. The operation was infiltrated by an undercover police officer, who testified at the trial. Both the state and the defense attorneys agreed to the principal facts in the case, but agreed that the "controlling issue" was whether or not Texas hold 'em is illegal gambling under the state's criminal code. In his opinion, Judge Thomas A. James Jr. determined that the question was if Texas hold 'em is a "game of skill or a game of chance... if chance predominates Texas hold 'em is gambling. If skill predominates, it is not gambling." This interpretation comes from a 1983 state Supreme Court ruling, which declared, for a game to constitute gambling, it must be a game where chanced predominates rather than skill. In evaluating the case, Judge James explained the "Domi...More: http: //booksllc.net/?id=2118942