Can a motion to dismiss a charge of loitering for the purpose of gambling be dismissed?

Thus, there is nothing in the complaint from which the court may reasonably infer that the defendant or others were engaged in loitering for the purpose of gambling and mere presence at a place where dice are being rolled, standing alone, cannot constitute loitering for the purpose of gambling. (cf. People v. Davidson, 291 AD2d 810 (4th Dept. 2002)(alleged that group of men were "shooting dice for money"). Therefore, defendant's motion to dismiss the count charging loitering for the purpose of gambling is granted.

Based on the foregoing, the court need not address the constitutionality of the statute.