The opinion
OLSZEWSKI, Judge,
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent from the majority’s holding that a coin cannot constitute a “gambling device” under 18 Pa.C.S. Sec. 5513(a)(1).
To the extent that it can be used for purposes other than gambling, a coin is not a gambling device per se. However, under the facts of this case, we would classify the coin used by appellant as a “gambling device.”
We agree with the majority and with appellant that, under the common and approved usage, a “device” could signify a machine, a gadget, an apparatus, or the like. Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary, Second Edition (1979), defines “gadget” as “any small object.” A coin is a small object. Appellant was gambling with that small object. It would follow that the coin was a device used for gambling.
I would affirm the judgment below.