xonor8bla car01 s. VaJwe opinion No. p-245 

Dimtrfct Attorney of mrrir County 

R8rri8 county courthou8e 

Houaton, *xau 77002 

wr Legaq of 'Pinball" or 

*Marble machines with 

imediate right of replay. 

Dear Mr. VanC~X 

Pou have recently rmquuted an opinion of thie offim conceraing the legality o f l plnballa or %arble* aaebinea with mdiate aad unrecorded right of replay. You ask tlb@ ~Oll~lng 

qwmtioa8 : 

1) Doe8 Attic10 630, V.P.C., a8 amended in 1965, l atcopt 

fro Jutfclo 642a, V.PX., all pi-11 and marbl* 

amchine uhich.ccnfer on uinainp pliyem u -iate 

and unrecorded right of replay? 

2) Under Article 6628 and Article 630, V.P.C., in it 

unlauful to poamess a pinbalf. or urble machine which 

auarda free qaaea and is any way, by coua$er of OtbOrwi+ racorda the ntmhor of free 9ans auarded? 

Article 642, V.P.C., daffau .tlrr, torr 'alot 8achine.a xt readr 

in part a0 follou8: 

-Art. 642a. slot UChbb.8 

*Definition of 8lot machine 

“section 1. The tUl8 '8$Ot aWhine', l 8 Wed ia thi8 

et, mUL8t 

"(a) &ty &O-C8ll0d '8lOt machine' or any Other 

m8chitu or mechaaical &i&e, by uhat8ceyer 

nam kncm, aa 88nntial part of which i8 8 

drum or reel with iluipnia thereon, and, 
. - 

Honorable Carol S. Vance, Page 2 (M-245) 

(1) which when operated may deliver, as the result of the application of an element of chance, 

any money, or property or other 

valuable thing, or 

(2) by the operation of which a peraon may be entitled to receive, a8 

the reclult of the application of 

an element of chance, any money or' 

property or other valuable thing; or 

"(b) tiy machine or mechanical device designed and 

manufactured or adapted to operate by means 

of the insertion of a coin, token, or other 

object and desig'ned, manufactured or adapted . 89 that when operated it may deliver, as 

the~result of an application of an element 

of chance, any money or property; or 

"(c) Any subassembly or essential part intended 

to be u8ed in connection with 8Uch machine 

or mechanical device." 

Article 642a, V.P.C., ha8 been interpreted by the Court of Civil 

ADDealS in State v. _ One ._ Slot Machine, 305 S.W.Zd 386 (Tex.Crim.App. 

lG7, no wrm,mthat Court framed the issue involved by stating: 

"The question involved is whether a marble table 

which is dea$gned and manufac,tured to operate by 

means of the insertion of a coin, and designed 

and manufactured so that when operated it may 

deliver free games, as a result of an application 

of an element of chance, is a,slot machine under 

the terms and provisions of Article 642a. . .even 

though the condition of the machine at the time 

of its seizure was such that free gamer could not 

be played on it:* 

The evidence in that ca8e 8howed that the machine in question 

was a marble machine designed and manufactured to deliver free 

games 88 an element of chance after the insertion of a coin. The 

evidence further showed, however , that at the time the machine was 

seized by officers it would not award free games for the reason 

+-tat certain parts of the machine had been disconnected so that it 

would not give free games. 

-1191- 
. . 

mals Carol s . Vance, Page 3 04-24s) 

In it8 holding in thi8 ca88, the court 8tated tbat within t#e 

roanhg of the grpi~ law8 the award of free grnrs i8 both proparty 

and a thing of value, further teatiraq, "We believe that the machine 

if2 involved i8 a 810t machine within the praVi8iOnR Of Article 

I( 

. . . 

In a965 the &$3l8latwa alter& the law oomcernieg pinball 

Mchily8 by en anendment to Article 630, V.P.C. The pertinent 

wrtion of that amendment reads a8 follou8: 

“Art. 630. 562 Peaittiaq device on premises 

"(a) . . . 

'(b) An inudiate end uwwoe&d right of 

repleyr uchanicrlly confermd on p1eyW8 of pinbell 

nachinea end rimilar devicw, ir not iatended to be 

included in the phrase ‘menryr property, or other valu&U tbinp’ in thirr chapter or any othot related 

statute of this 8tate. Aa amended mta W65, S8th 

-8.4 p. 690, ch. 329 91." 

It 18 

f8latote in 

Utd 8irrilU 

though they ._ 

our opinioe that the evident intent of'the Leg8uch amendment war to authorize pinbell machine8 

dtivices to be operated, used and pWaeS88d even 

& award en immediate and unrecorded right of replay. 

nmmverr unaor Article8 642(b) end 630, V.P.C., it would be 

unlauful to p088uo eny pinball aachine or 8i8ilu devioe 

which reaorded any right of replay. We are of the further 

opiniwiiihm uord ‘u#Wecorded’ as wed in the Ametibent 

prohibit8 8uch a mhine if it i8 equipPea with en indllcator 

shcuing the nunbor of frm -8 yet to be plqed or if it 

dimplay a counter uhich regietu8 free gm8 awarded. Our 

Ma8oming ia thi8 rogud i8 irwsr from tbcaw of Peaches et al. 

&$%!%E?id 4.1 89 i.L.R.2d 8Ol. 

tJm Suprcr#r Court of Indiure (1960) ,?m Id . 

mdet Article 630(b), V.P.C., p&W11 m&wIna 

8nd 8hilu device8 aam noul8wfultpbo powwemctxdod riqht of raplay. It 

#rM be Ualmt?itl houever under Article8 642(b) 

and 638, V.P.C., b poet& ury pinball aachine 
. . 

Honorable Carol S. Vance, Page 4 (M-245) 

( or similar device which recorded any right of 

replay. Consequently, such a machine would be unlawful if it is equipped with an indicator showin9 the number of free games yet to be played or 

if it displays a counter for free games awarded. 

Prepared by Jo Betsy Lewallen 

Assistant Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

Hawthorne Phillips, Chairman 

Kerns Taylor, Co-Chairmen 

Alfred Walker 

Brandon Bickett 

Bonald Luna 

Fielding Early 

EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 

A. J. Carubbi, Jr. 

- 1193-