Colorado § 18-10-107 - Gambling premises.

§ 18-10-107. Gambling premises.

(1) Whoever as owner, lessee, agent, employee, operator, or occupant knowingly maintains, aids, or permits the maintaining of gambling premises commits maintaining gambling premises.

(2) All gambling premises are common nuisances which shall be subject to abatement as provided by law.

(3) Maintaining gambling premises is a class 2 misdemeanor. If the offender is a repeating gambling offender, it is a class 6 felony.

Source: L. 71: R&RE, p. 479, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 40-10-107. L. 89: (3) amended, p. 842, § 96, effective July 1. L. 2021: (3) amended, (SB 21-271), ch. 462, p. 3208, § 340, effective March 1, 2022.

ANNOTATION

Annotator's note. Since § 18-10-107 is similar to former § 40-10-7, C.R.S. 1963, and laws antecedent thereto, relevant cases construing those provisions have been included in the annotations to this section.

Section does not deny equal protection. The fact that certain types of gambling were allowed pursuant to statute did not deny the petitioner, who was charged with gambling violations, equal protection of the law, especially where this section and § 18-10-103, under which charges of gambling were issued against the petitioner, applied equally to all persons and made no classifications or distinctions. Smaldone v. People, 173 Colo. 385, 479 P.2d 973 (1971).

The offenses described in section 18-10-105 and this section each require proof of a different element and are not duplicitous. McNulty v. People, 180 Colo. 246, 504 P.2d 335 (1972).

Intent is to prohibit all gambling places. It is clear that the law intends to, and does, prohibit every place commonly used or occupied for gambling of any character whatsoever, and the keeping and exhibiting of any instrumentality to be used for gambling and winning, betting, or gaining money or other property upon the result of any game, and likewise the practice of gambling. Everhart v. People, 54 Colo. 272, 130 P. 1076 (1913).

And section includes pool halls. The keeper of a pool hall licensed by a city who knowingly permitted several games for money to be played in his hall was held liable to conviction under this section. Koucles v. People, 64 Colo. 595, 173 P. 400 (1918).

Information need not name persons who played. In an information under this section for keeping a room to be used and occupied for gambling, it is not necessary to set forth the names of persons who played at games in such room. Chase v. People, 2 Colo. 509 (1875).

Evidence held sufficient. Paulino v. People, 113 Colo. 180, 155 P.2d 609 (1945).

In a prosecution for keeping a gambling house and gaming devices, evidence of a room and desk, of posted odds on athletic contests, and betting in the establishment occupied by a corporation in the business of which defendant was active was held sufficient to go to the jury and to sustain a verdict of guilty, such facts being uncontradicted. Wolfe v. People, 90 Colo. 102, 6 P.2d 927 (1932).

Ordinance licensing casino not valid city ordinance. Vick v. People, 166 Colo. 565, 445 P.2d 220 (1968).