State v. One Super Cherry Master Video 8-Liner Mach., 102 S.W.3d 132 (Tex. 2003). · Go Syfert
Search
State v. One Super Cherry Master Video 8-Liner Mach., 102 S.W.3d 132 (Tex. 2003). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases · …additional play in itself is not proscribed at p. 132 ⚠ not in text
25 citation events (25 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: City of San Antonio; San Antonio Police Department; Joe Vidal, Individually and in His Official Capacity; And Daniel Moynihan, Individually and in His Official Capacity v. Jimmy Martin, GGL Vendor Leasing LLC, and JLM Games, Inc. (txctapp4, 2026-05-27)
Treatment trajectory · 2003 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2003 2014 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 15 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) City of San Antonio; San Antonio Police Department; Joe Vidal, Individually and in His Official Capacity; And Daniel Moynihan, Individually and in His Official Capacity v. Jimmy Martin, GGL Vendor Leasing LLC, and JLM Games, Inc.
txctapp4 · 2026 · confidence medium
See State v. $1,760.00 in U.S. Currency, 406 S.W.3d 177, 178 (Tex. 2013) (per curiam); Hardy v. State, 102 S.W.3d 123 , 124–25 (Tex. 2003); State v. One Super Cherry Master Video 8- Liner Machine, 102 S.W.3d 132, 133 (Tex. 2003).
examined Cited as authority (rule) $1760.00 in United States Currency, 37 \8\" Liner MacHines v. State" (3×) also: Cited "see", Cited "see, e.g."
Tex. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
But in this case, the machines did not reward the players with representations of value redeemable for noncash merchandise prizes. 102 S.W.3d at 132 (emphasis in original).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Tex. Att'y Gen. · 2010 · confidence medium
See Hardy, 102 S.W.3d at 131 (addressing eight liners that awarded five-dollar gift certificates, redeemable for merchandise at Wal Mart); State v. One Super Cherry Master Video 8-Liner Machine, 102 S.W.3d 132, 133 (Tex. 2003) (concluding that eight liners that dispense gift certificates redeemable at local retailers do not, as a matter of law, meet the gambling device 'Your request suggests that the eight liners at issue each award "bingo cards or paper, electronic or mechanical card-minding devices, and pull-tab bingo" or gift certificates redeemable for the same.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) $1,943.76 in United States Currency Thirty One (31) \8 Liner\" MacHines Twelve (12) Arizola Restaurant Gift Cards Nineteen (19) Quick Trip Gift Cards Sixty Nine (69) Wal-Mart Shopping Cards One Armi Tanfoglio Giuseppe .25 Pistol and Ammunition v. State" (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
Tex. App. · 2009 · confidence medium
Co. , 837 S.W.2d 99, 100 (Tex. 1992). 26: State v. One Super Cherry Master Video 8-Liner Machine , 102 S.W.3d 132, 133 (Tex. 2003). 27: Elbaor v. Smith , 845 S.W.2d 240, 250 (Tex. 1992). 28: Id. 29: Cf. id. (determining that the case represented an issue of first impression whose resolution was not clearly foreshadowed because “only a couple of states [had] previously” reached the same holding and that “[t]he only Texas opinion which even hinted” at such a holding was one concurring opinion). 30: Cherry Master , 55 S.W.3d at 55 . 31: See Eubanks v. Mullin , 909 S.W.2d 574 , 576 n.1 (Te…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) $1,943.76 in United States Currency Thirty One (31) \8 Liner\" MacHines Twelve (12) Arizola Restaurant Gift Cards Nineteen (19) Quick Trip Gift Cards Sixty Nine (69) Wal-Mart Shopping Cards One Armi Tanfoglio Giuseppe .25 Pistol and Ammunition v. State"
Tex. App. · 2009 · confidence medium
Co., 837 S.W.2d 99, 100 (Tex. 1992). 26 … State v. One Super Cherry Master Video 8-Liner Machine, 102 S.W.3d 132, 133 (Tex. 2003). 27 … Elbaor v. Smith, 845 S.W.2d 240, 250 (Tex. 1992). 28 … Id. 10 Hardy decision, courts of appeals had been split on the issue of whether these devices met the exception of 47.01(4)(B).
discussed Cited "see" $1760.00 in United States Currency, 37 \8\" Liner MacHines v. State" (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
Tex. App. · 2012 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord Hardy, 102 S.W.3d at 132 (explaining that “additional play in itself is not proscribed”).
cited Cited "see" Fifty Six (56) Gambling Devices, Eight Thousand Three Hundred Thirty-Eight Dollars ($8,313.00) in United States Currency and Four Hundred Dollars ($400.00) in Gift Certificates v. State
Tex. App. · 2004 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. One Super Cherry Master Video, 55 S.W.3d 51, 52 (Tex.App.-Austin 2001) rev'd on other grounds, 102 S.W.3d 132 (Tex. 2003). 8.
cited Cited "see" Forty-One (41) Gambling Devices, Sixteen Thousand Six Hundred Forty-Eight Dollars ($16,648.00) in United States Currency and Eight Hundred Forty Dollars ($840.00) in Gift Certificates v. State
Tex. App. · 2004 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. One Super Cherry Master Video, 55 S.W.3d 51, 52 (Tex.App.-Austin 2001) rev'd on other grounds, 102 S.W.3d 132 (Tex. 2003). 7.
cited Cited "see" Alvin Ortiz v. State
Tex. App. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. One Super Cherry Master Video, 55 S.W.3d 51, 52 (Tex.App.-Austin 2001) rev'd on other grounds, 102 S.W.3d 132 (Tex. 2003). 8.
cited Cited "see" Veterans of Foreign Wars, Texas Division v. Greg Abbott, Attorney General of Texas
Tex. App. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See Hardy v. State, 46 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 555, 560-61 , 2003 Tex. LEXIS 40, at *22-25 (Apr. 3, 2003). 4 “naked declaration” disallowed by the supreme court.
cited Cited "see" Veterans of Foreign Wars, Texas Division v. Greg Abbott, Attorney General of Texas
Tex. App. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See Hardy v. State , 46 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 555, 560-61 , 2003 Tex. LEXIS 40, at *22-25 (Apr. 3, 2003). 3.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." the City of Fort Worth and David Cooke, in His Official Capacity as Fort Worth City Manager v. Stephannie Lynn Rylie, Texas C&D Amusements, Inc., and Brian and Lisa Scott D/B/A TSCA and D/B/A River Bottom Pub
Tex. App. · 2022 · signal: see also · confidence medium
Hardy v. State, 102 S.W.3d 123 , 131 n.5 (Tex. 2003). 12 132 (affirming forfeiture of eight-liners that, because they awarded gift certificates as prizes, “[did] not meet the section 47.01(4)(B) exclusion and were [thus] subject to forfeiture or destruction as gambling devices”); see also State v. One Super Cherry Master Video 8-Liner Mach., 102 S.W.3d 132, 133 (Tex. 2003) (referring to Hardy’s same-day holding and reciting that person in possession of alleged gambling device has “the burden to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, at a show cause hearing either that the machine i…
cited Cited "see, e.g." $8,074.68 in United States Currency 40 \8 Liner\" MacHines 3 Walmart Gift Cards And Misc. Papers v. State"
Tex. App. · 2015 · signal: see also · confidence medium
See Hardy, 102 S.W.3d at 129 ; see also State v. One Super Cherry Master Video 8-Liner Machine, 102 S.W.3d 132, 133 (Tex. 2003).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Tex. Att'y Gen. · 2012 · signal: see also · confidence medium
See Hardy, 102 S.W.3d at 132 ; see also State v. One Super Cherry Master Via'eo 8-LinerMach., 102 S.W.3d 132, 133 (Tex. 2003) (holding eight-liner machines in case constituted gambling devices); Elmore, 116 S.W.3d at 806 (same).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." TWENTY-NINE (29) GAMBLING DEVICES v. State (2×)
Tex. App. · 2003 · signal: compare · confidence low
Compare Hardy v. State, 50 S.W.3d 689 (Tex.App.-Waco 2001), affirmed, 102 S.W.3d 123 , with State v. One Super Cherry Master Video 8-Liner Mach., 55 S.W.3d 51 (Tex.App.-Austin 2001), reversed, 102 S.W.3d 132 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE of Texas, Petitioner,
v.
ONE SUPER CHERRY MASTER VIDEO 8-LINER MACHINE, Et Al., Respondent
01-0673.
Texas Supreme Court.
Apr 3, 2003.
102 S.W.3d 132
Idolina Garcia, William F. Lewis, Jr., Jeffrey S. Boyd, Howard G. Baldwin, First Assistant Attorney General of Texas, Michael T. McCaul, Executive Assistance Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General of Texas, Julie Caruthers Parsley, Office of the Solicitor General of Texas, Austin, John Cornyn, United States Senate, Washington, DC, for Petitioner., Eddie G. Shell, Burnet, Larry Zinn, San Antonio, Richard D. Davis, Austin, for Respondent.
Jefferson.
Cited by 17 opinions  |  Published
Justice JEFFERSON

delivered the opinion of the Court.

Today, in Hardy v. State, 102 S.W.3d 123 (Tex.2003), we held that although the State must establish probable cause before initiating a forfeiture proceeding, the person found in possession of an alleged gambling device has the burden to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, at a show cause hearing either that the machine is not a gambling device or that the exclusion in Penal Code section 47.01(4)(B) applies. Id. Further, we held that devices, known as “eight-liners,” that dispense tickets redeemable for cash, even if used only for additional play, or for gift certificates redeemable at local retailers do not, as a matter of law, meet the gambling device exclusion under section 47.01(4)(B).

In this civil forfeiture case, the evidence is undisputed that the eight-liners issued tickets that were redeemable for, among other prizes, cash used for additional play or gift certificates used to purchase items at local retailers. Regardless, the court of appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment on the jury verdict that the eight-liners were not gambling devices and, in addition, concluded that the trial court did not improperly place the burden of proof on the State. 55 S.W.3d 51, 53. Our decision in Hardy controls. Consequently, the court of appeals’ judgment is reversed and judgment is rendered for the State.