Childs v. State

864 P.2d 277 (1993)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Childs v. State

Nevada Supreme Court
864 P.2d 277 (1993)

  • Written by Brett Stavin, JD

Facts

Timothy John Childs (defendant) was convicted of fraudulent slot-machine manipulation in July 1990 based on handle popping, a procedure that entailed skillful manipulation of the slot-machine handle so that one or more of the reels ceased spinning prematurely. The procedure did not damage the slot machine and required no artificial device to cause the machine to malfunction. Childs appealed immediately thereafter. Ultimately, in September 1991, Childs won that appeal, Childs v. State (Childs I), in which the Nevada Supreme Court held that the relevant statute, Nevada Revised Statutes (N.R.S.) 465.070(7), was unconstitutionally vague because it did not define what constituted a normal pull of a slot-machine handle. Specifically, N.R.S. 465.070(7) provided that it was unlawful for any person “to manipulate, with the intent to cheat, any component of a gaming device in a manner contrary to the designed and normal operational purpose for the component, including, but not limited to, varying the pull of a handle of a slot machine, with knowledge that the manipulation affects the outcome of the game or with knowledge of any event that affects the outcome of the game.” While the appeal in Childs I was still pending, Childs was observed in two casinos again engaged in the same handle-popping conduct. For this conduct, Childs was charged with one count of fraudulent slot-machine manipulation and one count of attempted fraudulent slot-machine manipulation. Childs was sentenced to concurrent terms of five and 10 years in state prison. Childs appealed, arguing that the statute was unconstitutionally vague because, as in Childs I, it did not sufficiently describe what kind of conduct was prohibited.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Steffen, J.)

Dissent (Recanzone, J.)

Dissent (Springer, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership