,.,-.
838
OFFICE Of THE Al-l-ORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
kar SW:
ThLa will bo in refare
W, 1941, rwusstlng the apini
followlag~mtteri
the maohlnea.lz
I Bh3r. tocm to ‘mtsldero
ub hooae is 80 wrunged
hey 6~ desire; the wohines
an tbst ctmngers wha play the
Courre ir&bt alecrplay tbc abohintta
the looker room to pay for th*Ir
ggra4n fem.*
yhlle the maehinsa cre not deaorlbod, we proceed upon
the osauai~tionXhat they do not dltier from thn oommon vm-iety
0r alot mohlne derlos or the Hyng-arf” variety. tsl~ere
5i’e
your onininn Is eminsntly oorrect thnt ti2eomration and mo~in-
trnmoa ol’ auoh mschlnse by en incar-iomted. country club 18
illegal.
Ronarnble A. J. %rmub Jr., Page 2
-JOT are rpeolfIoellybranded am gambling Ucrloer
ln Artlale 619 of the Penal Code. Artiole 631 maker it un-
lawful for an7 prrr~n knavingly to no&In In a place where
they crc exhI~~te& Artlole 634 deol,ares that they are
agelnrt ~~8110 palioy en4 em e publio auleanos. Itoreover,
slot meohlns8 hate been held to constltate llotteries’ such
aa me prohIbIted by the Constitutionand Penal Code of this
stmte. Berry v. State 39 Tax. Cr. Re 240, 45 9.X. 571;
f)endergartv. State (Ct. Or. AQQ. 18997’57 S.V. 850: HIghtOwer
v. Stete, 124 tex. Cr. Rep. 24ij 61 S.Y. (2d) 618.
‘?heaetrataot that there gambling 6evloes are
aelntelnd by en u aruorateasountryg&& dose not ohange
the result. Artlole 4664 of Vernon’s Anaoteted Civil Statute8
dealare that,
ItAny * * . oountry crlubl
l + where persons
rssort for the pwyors of gambling * + * is hsre-
by deolerSd to be a oommqn nulsenoe. l * **
In Opinion go,.WXSM, we advI6ed tho,6eoreteryof
State thda oorvoretloaCOI@ not be formed for the purpose
of afiordlng Its members an’opportunityto play a t
lgemea*
qrohlbIte4by the Penal Code.
In Opinion lo. O-1145 we held that the Oorparete
veil lffor4eU no pmteotlon to a ooimtry olub operating an
*open saloon* In violation of the Conrtitutlonand TOXWB
Liquor Control Aot.
Thea. rules are preoisely ap+iaable here. It oen
not b.0gelnsald the9 OIW penal lava aMat g@&&g and a-
saJx!lm-. u gambling oecure is uaually of na oon-
sequence. For example; we iin& the Court In Soott t. State,
69 Tax. Cr. Rev. 616, 166 9.u. 226, aaylng:
*To bet at A gmas of dice I8 W&iwful wherever
the game ocoure.*
Ve note that your brief’cites our Oplnlon Ho. 0-2683,
i ’ There wa held thet und,era arlninal stat&e prahlblting oertaln
. aotr by *any vb r 80n, l a oarporstloncould not be rlned or Im-
>rlaonsd, oItIng Judge Lynch fnt. 6001 & Publishing Co. v. State,
84 Tex. Cr. Rm. 45Qi 203 5.V. 526; Overt v. State, 97 Tex. Cr.
Rep. 202..260 9.K 656; end 12 Ten. Jur. 271. Rowever, we there
.;. .-..
840
Honorable A. J. Bryan, Jr., page 3
pointed out that InQIrlduals,offlcere and agents of the
cor?oratIon,adnnectedwith the illegal aot might be prore-
cuted. ~%nwot(r, thlr holding wuld In no way restore lcgel-
Ity to nor ~prevent the sun?ressIonof archinsa vhlch are
sm gambling Bevloea and are exhibited for that nurpore.
Many romedie exist for their supwension.:
Under Artlola 637 of the Penal Code the may be
destroyed by order of oourt. Roberts v. Ooscett vTCA 1938)
69 9.X. (2d) 507 and Koore v. Alame (TCA 1925) 91 S.W. (26)
447 bold that no one o~n~oeeeae prooerty rIghta In E slot
msohlae; and in the latttr case it vas he14 that a sheriff
hp.8the right to sieve slot msohlner without 8 warrant, 80
long aa he aote ur)onnrobable oauee and doea not commit trer-
nasa In gaining entrance to the qremlrar. Rote, houever,
that the reoeirtonto of Cal'lison I. State (TCA 1940) 146 6.W.
(2U) 468, requires that they be exhlblted for the purpose of
gaming.
State P. Fnretrs Loan and Tru6t Co., 01 Tex. S30,
17 3.i. 60, State v. Jockey Club, 98 9.%. 642, Alamo Club
v. State, 147 %5.X.639, and City of Kink v. Grlfllth Amuse-
ment Co. (Sup. 19361 100 9.X. (ea) 695, a8 examples, are all
case, reoognlclngthe duty of the State to Instituteforfeiture
proceedingaagelnst tboee eorpcrGIonr mI,eusingthe corvorate
franchiseby vlolatlng the crlninal law.
Flnally you firereferred to Mtlole 4067 of Vernon’s
Annotated Civil Statuter,providing:
;
.The hebltual use, notual, threatened or aootes-
elated of any prewises; place or building or qart
thereof. for any of the follouln;iurea shall be
1
enJolned at the suit of tither t!w State or any
cltlren thereof:
"(1) For gaming or kcsplng or exhlbltlng
gamer prohibitedby IN..*,
Tn'Statev. Ftabl:and i?owleyUnited (TCA, 1938) 116
i ’ S.W. (Ed) 917 end Robb and Rowley United, Inc. v. State (TCA
w 19%) 127 9.W. (2d) 221, the Court held that lotteries we
a er3eolesof gaming and nulaance~rhlchWe Stn,teIs authorized
to &press by InJunctionunflerkrtlole 4607 of ths &vised
Clvll Ststutee, snd our ODinion Ea. 3-2290 Is in accordance
with thin rule. Carta.lnly, if lotteries are a sneciesrf
Ronorable A. J. Bryan, Jr.. page 4
m ubioh the State la suthorlaed to rupprera by InJunotIon
under Artlole 466T.n fortlo~ the State lsaymuppresr slot aaoh-
Ines, mpa gambling dtvloes. We eo held in Opinion Ho. o-2052.
To rsiktr, lt la our opinion rnd you are advised
that riot maahiner are gambling detlcee m ,p4. They may
not legally be operated and maintained by an Inaorporatedcoun-
try olub. and the State ir autborl?ed to suooram their main-
tenanaa.
Very truly your0
ATTORKEX OlCWUL OP TEXAS
JDStJr Aaslstant