State v. Madere
Louisiana Court of Appeal
1DissentGulotta, Judge
I dissent.
I agree with the State’s contention that a slot machine is a “gambling device” as defined in Section B. of the applicable statute; and, that the State Police are mandated to seize and destroy these machines although not in “use” or “used for gambling” at the time of seizure.
LSA-R.S. 15:31(A) empowers and mandates the State Police to “immediately destroy all gambling devices or machines used for gambling that come to their attention.” LSA-R.S. 15:31(B) defines the term “gambling device" as either a “slot machine” or a machine “with a cash automatic payout device” or “a pinball or…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Mugler v. KansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Lawton v. SteeleSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Samuels v. McCurdySupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Vaughan v. DowlingSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1962
- Schimpf v. ThomasSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1943
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.