BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Senator Mark Leno, Chair A
2009-2010 Regular Session B
1
7
5
AB 1753 (Hall) 3
As Amended April 14, 2010
Hearing date: June 22, 2010
Penal Code
MK:mc
SLOT MACHINES
HISTORY
Source: Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department
Prior Legislation: None
Support: Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office;
California State Sheriffs'
Association; Morongo Band of Mission Indians, Tribal Council (if
amended)
Opposition:Unknown
Assembly Floor Vote: Ayes 71 - Noes 0
KEY ISSUES
SHOULD THE PENALTIES FOR SUBSEQUENT CONVICTIONS OF SLOT MACHINE
RELATED OFFENSES BE AS FOLLOWS: $1,000-$10,000 FINE AND UP TO SIX
MONTHS IN JAIL FOR A SECOND OFFENSE; AND $10,000-$25,000 FINE AND UP
TO ONE YEAR IN THE COUNTY JAIL FOR A THIRD OR SUBSEQUENT OFFENSE?
IF A SLOT MACHINE OFFENSE INVOLVES MORE THAN ONE MACHINE OR MORE
(More)
AB 1753 (Hall)
PageB
THAN ONE LOCATION, SHOULD THERE BE AN ADDITIONAL FINE OF
$1,000-$5,000?
PURPOSE
The purpose of this bill is to increase the fines for repeat
slot machine related offenses.
Existing law provides that every person, who has in his
possession or under his control or who permits to be placed,
maintained or kept in any room, space, inclosure or building
owned, leased or occupied by him, or under his management or
control, any slot or card machine, contrivance, appliance or
mechanical device, upon the result of action of which money or
other valuable thing is staked or hazarded, and which is
operated or played by placing or depositing therein coins,
checks, slugs, balls, or other articles or device, or in any
other manner or as a result of the operation of which any
merchandise, money, representative or article of value, checks
or tokens, redeemable in or exchangeable for money or other
thing of value, is won or lost, or taken from or obtained from
such machine, when the result of action or operation of such
machine, contrivance, et cetera, is dependant upon hazard or
chance, and every person who has in his or her possession or
under his or her control, either as owner, lessee, agent,
employee, mortgagee, or otherwise, or who permits to be placed,
maintained or kept, in any room, space, inclosure or building,
owned, leased or occupied by him, or under his management or
control, any card dice, or any dice having more than six faces
or bases each, upon the result of action of which any money or
other valuable thing is staked or hazarded, or as a result of
the operation of which any merchandise, money, representative or
article of value, check or token, redeemable in or exchangeable
for money or any other thing of value is won or lost or taken
when the result of action or operation of such dice is dependant
upon hazard or chance is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a
fine between $100 and $1,000 and/or by imprisonment in the
county jail not exceeding six months. (Penal Code 330a.)
(More)
AB 1753 (Hall)
PageC
This bill provides that the penalty for a second offense of the
above shall be a fine between $1,000 and $10,000 and/or up to
six months in the county jail.
This bill provides that a third or subsequent offense of the
above shall be a fine between $10,000 and $25,000 and/or
imprisonment in the county jail for up to one year.
This bill provides that if the above offense involved more than
one machine or more than one location, an additional fine of
$1,000 to $5,000 shall be imposed per machine per location.
Existing law provides that it is unlawful for any person to
manufacture, repair, own, store, possess, sell, rent, lease, let
on shares, lend or give away, transport, or expose for sale or
lease, or to offer to repair sell, rent, lease, let on shares,
lend or give away, or permit the operation, placement,
maintenance, or keeping of, in any place, room, space, or
building owned, leased, or occupied, managed, or controlled by
that person, any slot machine or device as defined. It is
unlawful for any person to make or to permit the making of an
agreement with another person regarding any slot machine or
device, by which the user of the slot machine or device, as a
result of the element of hazard or chance or other unpredictable
outcome, may become entitled to receive money, credit,
allowance, or other thing of value or additional chance or right
to use the slot machine or device, or to receive any check,
slug, token, or memorandum entitling the holder to receive the
money, credit, allowance or other thing of value. A violation
is a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in county jail
and/or a fine not more than $1,000. (Penal Code 330b.)
This bill provides that a first violation of the above is
punishable by a fine between $500 and $1,000 and/or by
imprisonment in the county jail for up to 6 months.
This bill provides that the penalty for a second offense of the
above shall be a fine between $1,000 and $10,000 and/or up to
six months in the county jail.
(More)
AB 1753 (Hall)
PageD
This bill provides that a third or subsequent offense of the
above shall be a fine between $10,000 and $25,000 and/or
imprisonment in the county jail for up to one year.
This bill provides that if the above offense involved more than
one machine or more than one location, an additional fine of
$1,000 to $5,000 shall be imposed per machine per location.
Existing law provides that every person who manufactures, owns,
stores, keeps, possesses, sells, rents, leases, lets on shares,
lend or gives away, transports, or exposes for sale or lease, or
offers to sell, rent, lease, lets on shares, lend or give away
or who permits the operation of or permits to be placed,
maintained, used or kept in any room, space, or building owned,
leased, or occupied by him or her or under his or her management
or control, any slot machine or device as defined, and every
person who makes or permits to be made with any person any
agreement with reference to any slot machine or device as
defined, pursuant to which agreement with the user thereof, as a
result of any element of hazard or chance, may become entitled
to receive anything of value or additional chance or right to
use that slot machine, or to receive any check, slug, token, or
memorandum, whether of value or otherwise, entitling the holder
to receive anything of value is a misdemeanor punishable by a
fine of not more than $1,000 and/or up to six months in jail.
(Penal Code 330.1.)
This bill provides that the penalty for a second offense of the
above shall be a fine between $1,000 and $10,000 and/or up to
six months in the county jail.
This bill provides that a third or subsequent offense of the
above shall be a fine between $10,000 and $25,000 and/or
imprisonment in the county jail for up to one year.
This bill provides that if the above offense involved more than
one machine or more than one location, an additional fine of
$1,000 to $5,000 shall be imposed per machine per location.
(More)
AB 1753 (Hall)
PageE
RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION IMPLICATIONS
The severe prison overcrowding problem California has
experienced for the last several years has not been solved. In
December of 2006 plaintiffs in two federal lawsuits against the
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation sought a
court-ordered limit on the prison population pursuant to the
federal Prison Litigation Reform Act. On January 12, 2010, a
federal three-judge panel issued an order requiring the state to
reduce its inmate population to 137.5 percent of design capacity
-- a reduction of roughly 40,000 inmates -- within two years.
In a prior, related 184-page Opinion and Order dated August 4,
2009, that court stated in part:
"California's correctional system is in a tailspin,"
the state's independent oversight agency has reported.
. . . (Jan. 2007 Little Hoover Commission Report,
"Solving California's Corrections Crisis: Time Is
Running Out"). Tough-on-crime politics have increased
the population of California's prisons dramatically
while making necessary reforms impossible. . . . As a
result, the state's prisons have become places "of
extreme peril to the safety of persons" they house, .
. . (Governor Schwarzenegger's Oct. 4, 2006 Prison
Overcrowding State of Emergency Declaration), while
contributing little to the safety of California's
residents, . . . . California "spends more on
corrections than most countries in the world," but the
state "reaps fewer public safety benefits." . . . .
Although California's existing prison system serves
neither the public nor the inmates well, the state has
for years been unable or unwilling to implement the
reforms necessary to reverse its continuing
deterioration. (Some citations omitted.)
. . .
The massive 750% increase in the California prison
population since the mid-1970s is the result of
political decisions made over three decades, including
(More)
AB 1753 (Hall)
PageF
the shift to inflexible determinate sentencing and the
passage of harsh mandatory minimum and three-strikes
laws, as well as the state's counterproductive parole
system. Unfortunately, as California's prison
population has grown, California's political
decision-makers have failed to provide the resources
and facilities required to meet the additional need
for space and for other necessities of prison
existence. Likewise, although state-appointed experts
have repeatedly provided numerous methods by which the
state could safely reduce its prison population, their
recommendations have been ignored, underfunded, or
postponed indefinitely. The convergence of
tough-on-crime policies and an unwillingness to expend
the necessary funds to support the population growth
has brought California's prisons to the breaking
point. The state of emergency declared by Governor
Schwarzenegger almost three years ago continues to
this day, California's prisons remain severely
overcrowded, and inmates in the California prison
system continue to languish without constitutionally
adequate medical and mental health care.<1>
The court stayed implementation of its January 12, 2010, ruling
pending the state's appeal of the decision to the U.S. Supreme
Court. On Monday, June 14, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed
to hear the state's appeal in this case.
This bill does not appear to aggravate the prison overcrowding
crisis described above.
(More)
---------------------------
<1> Three Judge Court Opinion and Order, Coleman v.
Schwarzenegger, Plata v. Schwarzenegger, in the United States
District Courts for the Eastern District of California and the
Northern District of California United States District Court
composed of three judges pursuant to Section 2284, Title 28
United States Code (August 4, 2009).
COMMENTS
1. Need for This Bill
According to the author:
Unlicensed slot machines, often disguised as video
arcade machines, are being placed in small businesses in
largely lower income neighborhoods. These slot machines
look and act nearly identical to licensed slot machines
found at tribal gaming facilities yet are being place
din bars, restaurants, liquor stores and tobacco shops.
Revenues from these machines are unregulated, unreported
and untaxed.
The profits from these illegal slot machines make the
minor penalty for conviction merely a cost of doing
business for these offenders. Therefore, law
enforcement has had few tools available to stop and
deter these machines from operating throughout
California.
2. Increased Penalties for Repeat Offenders
This bill increases the penalty for repeat offenders of
provisions prohibiting slot machine type devices. According to
the sponsor:
The problem we seek to address is that video slot
machines are being placed in small businesses by
organized groups. The machines are placed in liquor
stores, donut shops, restaurants, video stores, and
tobacco shops. The video slot machines are generally
placed in businesses located in lower income
communities. The profits from these machines are split
between the business owner and the group that provides
the video slot machines. The money is unreported and
untaxed. The machines are unregulated and have high
(More)
AB 1753 (Hall)
PageH
retention rates which provide these people with the
ability to take advantage of lower income individuals.
Sometimes the video slot machines are camouflaged as
video arcade games. This allows the illegal machine to
be place in public view without being easily detected.
The business owner can switch the machine from an arcade
game to a video slot machine by remote control.
The penalty for this misdemeanor offense does not
discourage the criminal activity. The profits from these
illegal machines make the minor penalty for conviction
merely a cost of doing business for these offenders.
There are many repeat offenders who use multiple
machines at each location. Increasingly penalties and
fines will better deter people from engaging in this
activity and help prevent the victimization of lower
income individuals.
The penalties for repeat offenders in this bill are:
A second offense of the above shall be a fine between
$1,000 and $10,000 and/or up to six months in the county
jail.
A third or subsequent offense of the above shall be a
fine between $10,000 and $25,000 and/or imprisonment in the
county jail for up to one year.
If the offense involved more than one machine or more
than one location, an additional fine of $1,000 to $5,000
shall be imposed per machine, per location.
With penalty assessments of approximately 270%, a fine of $1,000
is actually $3,700, a fine of $5,000 is actually $18,500, a fine
of $10,000 is actually $37,000, and a fine of $25,000 is
AB 1753 (Hall)
PageI
actually $92,500.<2> Are these fines appropriate for repeat
offenders?
***************
---------------------------
<2> Until the budget year 2002-2003, there was 170% in penalty
assessments applied to every fine. The current penalty
assessments are approximately 270%. (See Penal Code 1464,
1465.7, and 1465.8; Government Code 70372, 7600.5, 76000 et
seq, and 76104.6.)