Coin Slot Magazine - #075 - 1981 - May [International Arcade Museum]
an earlier case, State v. Ricks, 41 So.2d 232 (1949), in
sacrifice, and the extent to which it has heretofore been
which it had upheld a statute with provisions similar to the
regarded as within the police power. So far as property is
one in question against a due process attack. The decision
inoffensive or harmless, it can only be condemned or
in Ricks was based on a federal court case, Lawton v.
destroyed by legal proceedings, with due notice to the
Steele, 152 U. S. 133 (1894), in which the United States
Supreme Court was asked to declare that a New York
of the community, due process of law may authorize its
statute, which provided for summary destruction of nets
summary destruction."
owner; but, so far as it is dangerous to the safety or health
used for taking or capturing fish illegally, violated the
Finally, the court concluded that the statute in question
Fourteenth Amendment of the U. S. Constitution because
it ordered the confiscation of goods without a hearing. The
federal court upheld the validity of the New York statute for
does not offend the Louisiana constitutional provisions
reasons which are discussed in detail later in this article.
There was no intention on the part of the Constitutional
The court then considered the application of the due
process provisions of the Louisiana Constitution to the
regarding due process and the right to private property.
This conclusion was based upon the following findings: (1)
Convention (which established the aforementioned direc
tives to suppress gambling) or the people to prohibit
facts of this case. The court noted that the Constitution
legislation such as the statute in question (mandating the
itself
seizure and destruction of slot-machines without notice
provides
that
property
rights
are
subject
to
"reasonable statutory restrictions and the reasonable ex
and
ercise of the police power" (citing a law review article
stitutional directive to suppress gambling by providing for
which stated that the background of this constitutional
the summary destruction of slot-machines.
provision indicates an understanding that the statutory
limitations on property rights and the police power regula
a
hearing);
(2) the
legislature followed the con
The court noted that the latest definitive statutory ex
pression of the legislature of Louisiana stated that slot-
tions governing property rights are to be given a broad
machines are inherently detrimental to the community and
ambit). In addition, the court noted, the Constitution in
thus properly the subject of summary destruction.
directly provides for the taking of contraband without
In accordance with its findings, the Supreme Court of
satisfying procedural due process requirements of notice
Louisiana decreed as follows: (1) reversed the holding of
and hearing. The court also stressed the constitutional ad
the Court of Appeal that the statute in question is uncon
monition
that "gambling
shall
be defined
by and sup
pressed by the legislature."
The court then reviewed the history of Louisiana con
stitutional directives pertaining to gambling in general and
to slot-machines in particular and the legislation which had
been passed over the years as a means of establishing
specific policy with regard to such directives. Despite the
stitutional and (2) dissolved the trial court's order that the
state return the slot-machine to the plaintiff.
In the second part of this series which will appear in the
June issue of The Coin Slot, Mr. Fischl addresses the dis
senting opinions in the case and the possibility of the case
being heard by the United States Supreme Court. Do Not
miss the conclusion of this excellent article.
changes in the wording of the relevant legislation over the
years, the court concluded that the essential elements re
main the same (including the right and power of the police
to destroy slot-machines without notice and a hearing).
Brown had argued that the absence of a statute
prohibiting the possession and use of slot-machines
removes them from the designation "contraband." The
court replied as follows: "We answer this argument by
observing that slot-machines have historically been
treated as contraband." While an earlier Louisiana case,
Gascon v. State of Louisiana, Department of Public
Safety, 263 So.2d 81 (1954), had held that slot-machines
not being used in gambling were not contraband, this
court pointed out that the legislature had subsequently
amended the law (R.S. 15:31) in such a way as to remove
any doubt that the slot-machines did not have to be used
in gambling to subject them to summary destruction. By
providing for the summary destruction of slot-machines,
the legislature followed the constitutional mandate to sup
press gambling. The present statute is at least as direct a
legislative pronouncement that slot-machines are contra
band as would a statute simply making their possession il-
.com
m
:
u
m
e
d fro de-mus
e
d
conclusion on the o
statement
by the United States
a
a
n in l following
a v. rc New
.
w
Supreme Court
Sentell
Orleans & C.R. Co., 106
o
w
D
w
U.S. 698 (1897):
://w "It is true that under the Fourteenth
p
t
t
h no state can deprive a person of his life,
Amendment
The court then concluded that the challenged statute
does not violate the federal constitution and based this
liberty, or property without due process of law; but in
determining what is due process of law we are bound to
consider the nature of the property, the necessity for its
© May
The 1981
International Arcade Museum
JUST DISCOVERED!
Original factory warehouse of Scopitone
San Francisco headquarters. Approximatey
60 machines, hundreds of spare parts, films,
etc. stored since 1965. We are offering
working machines individually or in lots until
supply is exhausted for $895 ea. French
model & film and $1495 ea. American model &
film. For further information contact:
COLLECTOR'S WORLD
2249 Honolulu Avenue
Montrose, California 91020
(213) 248-9451
THE COIN SLOT — 59
http://www.arcade-museum.com/