State v. One Super Cherry Master Video 8-Liner MacHine
Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)
1Opinion of the CourtJohn E. Powers, Justice
(Assigned).
The State of Texas appeals from a judgment rendered on the jury’s verdict in a forfeiture action brought by the State against property owned by Alvin Ray Fen-ter and P.F.A. Corporation. See Tex.Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 18.18(b)-(g) (West Supp.2001). We will affirm the judgment.
The disputed property consists of thirty-two machines described as “eight liners,” each of which is alleged to be a “gambling device” as that term is defined in section 47.01(4) of the Texas Penal Code; related articles alleged to be “gambling paraphernalia” as defined in section 47.01(6) of the Texas Penal…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Ortiz v. JonesTexas Supreme Court · 1996
- Victoria Bank & Trust Co. v. BradyTexas Supreme Court · 1991
- Ames v. AmesTexas Supreme Court · 1989
- State v. Wofford, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2000
- In the Interest of C.Q.T.M.Court of Appeals of Texas · 2000
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Hardy v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 2003
- Hardy v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)2001
- State v. One Super Cherry Master Video 8-Liner MacHineTexas Supreme Court · 2003
- Legere v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)2002
- TWENTY-NINE (29) GAMBLING DEVICES v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2003
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.