Coin Slot

Coin Slot Magazine - #075 - 1981 - May [International Arcade Museum]
Are There Constitutional Limitations on the Confiscation
of Illegal Slot Machines by Law Enforcement Officers?
by Louis J. Fischl
This article deals with the history of the particular case in
Professor of Business,
which that ruling was made and with an evaluation of the
San Jose State University
court's reasoning in that case based upon the protection
Member,
State Bar of California
In recent issues of The Coin Slot you have been made
against the seizure of property provided by the United
States Constitution as interpreted by the United States
Supreme Court.
Summary of the Law Relating to
aware of a case in Louisiana dealing with the confiscation
of a penny slot machine. Louis Fischl has taken time from
his busy schedule to analyze the case for us. In the first
part of this two part series we are deftly led through the
three levels of Louisiana's court system as Mr. Fischl ex
plains in layman's terms the plight of Mr. Brown.
As stated in my earlier article (The Coin Slot, January,
State Confiscation of Property
The right of a state to make illegal the possession of
devices that can be used for gambling purposes has long
been settled. This right is based upon the "police power"
of a state — i.e., that power to place restraints on the per
sonal freedom and property rights of persons for the
protection of the public safety, health, and morals or the
1981), even in the states which have legalized the posses
promotion
sion of antique slot-machines, dealers and collectors are
prosperity. While such power is very broad, it is subject to
of
the
public
convenience
and
general
confronted with legal problems in view of the fact that few,
limitations of the federal and state constitutions, and es
if any, of such laws define completely the meaning of "anti
pecially to the requirement of due process. In this regard,
que slot-machine." In those states where such laws have
the Fourteenth Amendment of the federal Constitution
not been
passed, the possession of any slot-machine
(depending, to some extent, on the definition of "slot-
machine") is tainted with some element of illegality, and
the laws of such states typically provide for the confisca
tion and destruction of this kind of property. In a recent
decision, the Louisiana Supreme Court appears to have
ruled that there are no constitutional limitations on the
confiscation of slot-machines by law enforcement officers.
Montana — Wait
'Til Next Year
We received word from our champion in Montana
that the bill was tabled. There is a misunderstanding
on the part of one of the senators who feels that any
type of ownership of slot machines will ultimately
lead to legalized gambling in the state. We know that
there is no substance to this assumption. The ob
vious result is that we see a need for more education.
Perhaps the most valuable tool we could provide
at this point in addition to the outline in Dick
Bueschel's "An Illustrated Price Guide to the 100
Most Collectible Slot Machines, Volume 2" is to have
an outline of probable questions or stumbling blocks
and effective answers. We can think of some of the
questions but we haven't been significantly involved
in enough cases to have a broad base. Our sugges
.com
m
:
u
from -muse
d
e
outline. If you think
work,
ade tell us that too. We
oad it won't
l
c
r
n
a
. aid.
think it will
a valuable
Dow be / like
w to w write
w
/
If you would
to the Senator in Montana
:
http to table the bill, call or write, Editor, The
who helped
tion is, if you have been involved in the ground work
of a bill — successful or not — share your ex
perience with us so that we can develop a workable
Coin Slot, P.O. Box 612, Wheatridge, Co. 80033,
(303) 279-3343.
prohibits a state from depriving any person of life, liberty,
or property without due process of law. The meaning of
this due process clause and the extent of its protection
cannot be determined from the language in the clause
itself; rather, the meaning has developed over the years as
the result of cases before the U. S. Supreme Court in
which the court has had to balance the interests involved:
the interests of state government to regulate private con
duct as a means of achieving various social objectives and
the interests of private persons to being protected against
the sacrifice of their personal liberties (including the liberty
to own property).
With regard to the collection of antique slot-machines,
the doctrine of due process raises two
May a state outlaw the possession
machines? (2) Even if the outlawing
machines is constitutionally permissible,
ment officers confiscate such machines
basic issues: (1)
antique slot-
of antique slot-
may law enforce
without following
of
the procedural due process requirements of the Con
stitution? As stated earlier, the answer to the first question
has long been settled (though it seems that the issue
should be raised again in view of the new developments in
the legal transactions involving slot-machines — transac
tions which cannot reasonably be construed to be
detrimental to public health, safety, and morals). The
answer to the second question has not yet been answered
by the U. S. Supreme Court. In essence, procedural due
process, as it relates to the confiscation of illegal slot-
machines, means that there can be no action to deprive
the owner of such property without the observance of
those general rules established in the American legal
system of jurisprudence for the security of private rights.
Those rules require the following: (1) The owner of
property which is to be confiscated must be advised of the
charges against possessing the property in question and
must be given a reasonable opportunity to meet such
charges by way of defense or explanation; this includes
the assistance of counsel, if requested, and the right to call
witnesses to give testimony. (2) A fair hearing — a real op
portunity to protect the owner's property rights; this does
Continued on page 58
© May
The International
Arcade Museum
1981
THE COIN SLOT — 57
http://www.arcade-museum.com/