Legal Opinion
State v. Fry
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided November 4, 1993No. B14-92-01196-CR, B14-92-01197-CR and B14-92-01198-CRPublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MURPHY, Justice.
These are appeals from the dismissal of three separate indictments alleging each ap-pellee committed the offenses of keeping a gambling place and possessing a gambling device. TexJPenal Code Ann. §§ 47.04, 47.06 (Vernon 1989). After a hearing, the trial court found that the statutes defining these offenses, as well as section 47.01(3), which defines “gambling device,” are uncon stitutionally vague and overbroad, both as written and as applied to the devices possessed by appellees. The court also found the statutes’ vagueness resulted in arbitrary, discriminatory, and…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- United States v. SalernoSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Miller v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Papachristou v. City of JacksonvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Ex Parte GranvielCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1978
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Duncantell v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2007
- State v. Wofford, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2000
- Weyandt v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2001
- Anthony v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2006
- KFOURI v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2010
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.