Illegal Gambling Penal Code
Read this complete New York Consolidated Laws, Penal Law - PEN § 225.00 Gambling offenses; definitions of terms on Westlaw FindLaw Codes are provided courtesy of Thomson Reuters Westlaw, the industry-leading online legal research system. Illegal Gaming or Gambling in California California Penal Code Section 330 It is illegal to be a dealer in a game that is not sanctioned for gambling. The illegality comes in when someone is collecting money as people gamble similar to how Vegas does it and the various other casinos even throughout Los Angeles County. In the United Arab Emirates, however, any kind of gambling is prosecuted and players can serve up to two years in jail under the Penal Code’s Article 414. The Telecommunications Regulatory Authority controls all Internet content and thus prevents access to online casinos. Promoting gambling in the second degree is a class A misdemeanor. Promoting gambling in the first degree.
SAN DIEGO (CN) – The “claw machine,” in which kids try to drop a claw onto a stuffed animal, is an illegal gambling operation and should be shut down, a woman claims in a class action against Denny’s.
Ashley Cheesbrough sued Denny’s in Superior Court.
Cheesbrough claims that Denny’s “engaged in unlawful business acts to earn higher profits by exposing its patrons to illegal gambling devices and providing them with opportunities to gamble. Denny’s conduct violates public policies tethered to laws that are designed to protect the public against the deleterious effects of gambling.”
She claims that Denny’s encourages illegal gambling by offering “games of chance” in the arcade sections of its restaurants.
“Within these arcade sections are games that require the player to insert money (usually quarters) into the machine and offer the player a chance to win stuffed dolls, toys, or other prizes. Such machines include, but are not limited to, claw machines. However, these machines are illegal gambling devices that require little or no skill and are predominantly games of chance. The Bureau of Gambling Control has declared that machines including but not limited to claw machines are ‘common types of illegal devices’ under California Penal Code sections 330a, 330b, and 330.1,” the complaint states.
A claw machine player uses a joystick to drop a claw one time onto a stuffed animal or another prize.
Courthouse News conducted in-house interviews to determine whether anyone ever wins an animal at the claw game. One highly placed source claimed he never saw anyone win. Another source, however, said the trick was to watch others lose first, and see which animals are loosely packed. When the losers leave, the trick is to go after the loosely packed animal.
Cheesbrough states: “If the claw fails to retrieve a prize, the player loses. If the claw grips a prize, it lifts the prize up and ascends to the top of the machine and rattles, often knocking the prize out of the claw and the player loses. On occasion, the prize does not get rattled out of the claw, and the claw moves to the corner of the machine and releases its content. The prize is dropped into the opening and dispensed into a hatch for collection.”
Cheesbrough claims the claw machines are illegal gambling devices because they are games of chance, not games of skill.
“Unlike many other arcade games (e.g. Pac-Man, Skeeball, pinball, etc.) which require hand-eye coordination, concentration, and physical skill, the outcome of operation of claw machines is based entirely or predominantly on chance or hazard. In other words, the player has no ability to control the outcome. The Bureau of Gaming Control clarified that a lawful device is one that is predominantly a game of skill ‘on which what can be won is limited to additional chances or free plays. If, however, the player has paid to play and can win something other than additional plays, such as food, toys or other prizes, the machines does [sic] not qualify for the amusement device exception and is an illegal gambling device.”
Cheesbrough claims that even if claw machines were games of skill, the fact that users play to win physical prizes makes them illegal.
By having claw machines in its restaurants, Cheesbrough says, Denny’s is contributing to the problem of gambling addiction in kids and adults.
“Gambling addiction is a serious and devastating problem for many adults and a growing problem among children. The Royal College of Psychiatrists concluded that ‘all gaming machines, regardless of the size of the stake or the amount of prize money, are unsuitable for children and young people.’ The Royal College of Psychiatrists strongly recommends that they should cease to be made legally available to them,” the complaint states.
Cheesbrough says she personally lost money trying to win prizes out of claw machines at Denny’s, and never would have played them had she “known that the machine was an illegal gambling device.”
The complaint does not say how much money she lost playing the game.
But she claims that she and other class members will continue to lose money and Denny’s will “retain proceeds of its ill-gotten gains” unless the court orders Denny’s to remove the claw machines and other games of chance from its restaurants.
She seeks a preliminary and permanent injunction, disgorgement and restitution for unfair competition and business law violations.
She is represented by Gene J. Stonebarger of Folsom and counsel James R. Patterson of San Diego.
§712-1230 Forfeiture of property used in illegal gambling. Any gambling device, paraphernalia used on fighting animals, or birds, implements, furniture, personal property, vehicles, vessels, aircraft, or gambling record possessed or used in violation of this part, or any money or personal property used as a bet or stake in gambling activity in violation of this part, may be ordered forfeited to the State, subject to the requirements of chapter 712A. [L 1972, c 9, pt of §1; am L 1973, c 201, pt of §1; am L 1979, c 83, §1; am L 1989, c 261, §22; am L 1992, c 57, §3]
Cross References
Surrender or forfeiture of animals, see §711-1110.5.
COMMENTARY ON §712-1230
This section restates in general terms the previous law relating to forfeiture of gambling stakes, records, and devices.[1] The forfeiture is specifically made subject to the requirements of §701-119 which embodies a single procedure for the establishment of all forfeitures declared by the Penal Code. The procedure provides, as did the previous law,[2] for the protection of innocent owners of property which is involved in the commission of an offense. Intentionally omitted are prior provisions permitting a person who loses funds gambling to sue for recovery,[3] permitting a police officer, officer, or other person to sue to recover treble damages based on the amount lost (in which case one-half went to the person so prosecuting and one-half to the state for use for public schools),[4] and voiding instruments of indebtedness used in gambling.[5] These provisions are unrealistic, seldom, if ever, invoked, and unnecessary in view of the general forfeiture provision. This section was renumbered from §712-1229 to §712-1230, by Act 201, Session Laws 1973.
In State v. Nobuhara, 52 Haw. 319, 474 P.2d 707 (1970), the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled that certain moneys seized under a violation of former HRS §746-8, which proscribed betting on an athletic contest, could not be forfeited. The Court declared that there was no evidence to tie in the moneys with the betting activities and thus could not be forfeited under HRS §746-12.
SUPPLEMENTAL COMMENTARY ON §712-1230
Act 83, Session Laws 1979, amended this section to better define the properties which may be forfeited when used in illegal gambling. Within this context, the legislature specifically intended that 'only paraphernalia used in fighting animals and birds be susceptible to...forfeiture...as distinguished from the animals or birds themselves.' Conference Committee Report No. 60. The Act also established a preponderance of evidence standard for courts to use in determining whether forfeiture should be ordered.
Act 57, Session Laws 1992, amended this section to clarify that forfeitures of property used in illegal gambling are subject to the requirements of chapter 712A. House Standing Committee Report No. 1198-92, Senate Standing Committee Report No. 1947.
Case Notes
The State must prove the existence of a substantial connection between the currency being forfeited and the illegal activity; where $1,300 of the subject currency was substantially connected to appellant's illegal gambling activity and §712A-11(4) provides that the State need not trace the proceeds exactly, $1,300 was properly ordered forfeited to the State. 104 H. 323, 89 P.3d 823.
Where State failed to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the subject currency of $1,900 seized from appellant's trousers was involved in appellant's gambling transactions, trial court erred in ordering currency forfeited to State; there was no evidence connecting currency to any illegal activity, and absent proof of a substantial connection between the illegal activity and the res, the currency was not subject to forfeiture. 104 H. 323, 89 P.3d 823.
Insufficient showing that property was integral part of illegal gambling operation. 5 H. App. 547, 705 P.2d 54.
__________
§712-1230 Commentary:
1. See former H.R.S. §§746-11, 746-12.
2. Id. §746-13.
3. Id. §746-16.
Illegal Gambling Texas Penal Code
4. Id. §746-18.
Illegal Gambling Revised Penal Code
5. Id. §746-19.