On September 19, 1982, after a preliminary examination, defendant was bound over to circuit court on a charge of breaking into a coin operated device, MCL 752.811(a); MSA 28.643(101)(a). Subsequently, the circuit court de
At the preliminary examination, the prosecution presented evidence that defendant, then a coach operator, had taken money with a wire metal instrument from a bus fare box while the bus was parked at the SEMTA bus terminal in Inkster. Defendant now argues that a bus fare box is not covered by MCL 752.811; MSA 28.643(101), which reads:
"An Act relating to coin operated devices, including but not limited to parking meters, coin telephones and vending machines; and providing for a penalty.
"A person shall be guilty of a felony punishable upon conviction by confinement in the state prison for a period not to exceed 3 years or by a fine of not more than $1,000.00 or both if he does either of the following:
"(a) Enters or forces an entrance, alters or inserts any part of an instrument into any parking meter, vending machine dispensing goods or services, money changer or any other device designed to receive currency or coins with the intent to steal.
"(b) Knowingly possesses a key or device, or a drawing, print or mold thereof, adapted and designed to open or break into any such machine with intent to steal money or other contents from it.”
Reading only the body of the statute, we could reasonably conclude that defendant’s alleged actions are included. A bus fare box may be defined as "a device designed to receive currency or coins”. However, we decline to include a bus fare box within the statute because we believe that such interpretation would violate the title-object clause
The legal concept of ejusdem generis states that, in a statute where general words follow the designation of particular subjects, the meaning of the general words will ordinarily be presumed to be and construed as restricted by the particular designation and as including only things of the same kind, class, character, or nature as those specifically enumerated. People v Smith,
We conclude that a bus fare box is not included in this title. As commonly understood, a "coin operated device” includes such objects as vending machines, pay telephones, pay video games, and slot machines. Other courts have defined a coin operated device as "a device or a machine operated by a coin or by a substitute for a coin”, Remington-Rand, Inc v Gage,
A bus fare box is not such a device. Instead, it is merely a receptacle that receives and stores money.
Therefore, if we interpreted "a device designed to receive currency or coins” to include a bus fare box, the act would exceed the scope of its title. But the title-object clause requires that the act itself not exceed the scope of its title. Maki v East Tawas,
In Maki, supra, the title to the act in question stated that the act would grant governmental immunity for injuries caused by negligence. How
In Bankhead v Mayor of River Rouge,
Likewise, the Supreme Court again held that the clause was violated in People v Stanton,
Although the title to
However, construing MCL 752.811; MSA 28.643 to exclude bus fare boxes does not leave bus companies unprotected. MCL 750.113; MSA 28.308 proscribes stealing from such boxes. Under that statute, the Legislature clearly provided that stealing from a bus fare box constitutes a six-month misdemeanor.
Reversed and remanded. The information is quashed.
Notes
In addition, when interpreting a statute, we must construe ambiguities in favor of lenity. Bell v United States,
In United Postage, the defendants had characterized the machines in that case as silent salesmen.”
Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, p 441, brings out this distinction. It defines a coin box as "a locked receptable to store the coins inserted in a coin-operated device (as in a pay phone)”.