- Arkansas
- Are Slot Machines Legal In South Carolina U.s
- Are Slot Machines Legal In South Carolina State
- Are Slot Machines Legal In South Carolina County
- Are Slot Machines Legal In South Carolina
Legal Information for slot machines State and Federal Laws Slot Machines Unlimited Inc. Is registered by the United States Department of Justice – Attorney General’s Office in Washington, DC and operates in full compliance with the Gambling Devices Act of 1962. This registration includes the buying, reconditioning, repairing and selling of gambling devices.
453 S.E.2d 896 (1995)
STATE of South Carolina, Appellant,v.FOUR VIDEO SLOT MACHINES: (1) Serial No. 000063, property of Robin Eugene Weeks, 36 Carolina Drive, Greenville, seized from Endless Challenge, 1106 North Pleasantburg, Greenville, Case No. 91-11379; (2) Serial No. 2752, property of Robin Eugene Weeks, 36 Carolina Drive, Greenville, seized from Endless Challenge, 1106 North Pleasantburg Drive, Greenville, Case No. 91-11379; (3) Serial No. A06889, property of Charles Reeves d/b/a Joytime Amusement, 1243 Laurens Road, seized from The Grapevine Lounge, 2714 Wade Hampton Boulevard, Greenville, Case No. 91-11425; (4) Serial No. NONE, property of Jim Briggs d/b/a Gem Amusement Co., seized from Bo-Nat's Grocery, 302 Poinsett Highway, Greenville, Case No. 91-11464, Respondent.
No. 24183.
Supreme Court of South Carolina.
Heard March 15, 1994.
Decided January 23, 1995.
Rehearing Denied February 24, 1995.
*897 Sol. Joseph J. Watson and Asst. Circuit Sol. Regan A. Pendleton, Greenville, for appellant.
Fred Thompson, III, of Scardato & Thompson, and Gedney Howe, III, Charleston, for respondent.
CHANDLER, Acting Chief Justice:
At issue in this case is whether 'Lucky 8 Line' machines are exempt from the provisions of S.C.Code Ann. § 12-21-2710 (Supp. 1993).[1] The Magistrate held the machines in violation of the statute and ordered their destruction. The Circuit Court reversed the Magistrate's finding and the State appeals.
We reverse.
A review of the essential facts reveals that 'Lucky 8 Line' is a coin-operated machine with a video display designed to simulate a slot machine. The player inserts money and presses a button. A computer program causes the screens to roll and randomly stop, displaying words and symbols. Certain combinations of symbols earn the player an additional turn. The player has absolutely no control over the combination of words or symbols appearing on the video screen.
The applicable statute, § 12-21-2710, provides, in part:
It is unlawful for any person to keep on his premises or operate or permit to be kept on his premises or operated within this State any vending or slot machine, punch board, pull board, ... or other device pertaining to games of chance of whatever name or kind, ... but the provisions of this section do not extend to coin-operated nonpayout pin tables, in-line pin games, and video games with free play feature....The statute exempts three specific types of machines: (1) coin-operated nonpayout pin tables, (2) in-line pin games or (3) video games with free play feature. The 'Lucky 8 Line' machine is clearly a slot machine. State v. DeAngelis, 257 S.C. 44, 183 S.E.2d 906 (1971). In DeAngelis, we recognized that such machines, requiring no skill, were not exempted under the predecessor statute. Respondents assert that inclusion of the phrase 'video games with free play feature' in the 1982 amendment to the statute, 1982 Acts No. 466,[2] now renders the 'Lucky 8 Line' machines exempt. We disagree.
It is well established that, in interpreting a statute, our sole function is to determine and give effect to the intention of the legislature, with reference to the meaning of the language used and the subject matter and purpose of the statute. State v. Ramsey, ___ S.C. ___, 430 S.E.2d 511 (1993). Words must be given their plain and ordinary meaning without resort to subtle or forced construction to limit or expand the statute's operation. State v. Blackmon, 304 S.C. 270, 403 S.E.2d 660 (1991).
Here, the General Assembly has declared slot machines unlawful. Respondents' construction of the statute equating the slot machines in question with a 'video game with free play feature' is untenable.
*898 Respondents rely upon this Court's opinion in Powell v. Red Carpet Lounge, 280 S.C. 142, 311 S.E.2d 719 (1984), to reach a contrary result. Reliance on Powell is misplaced. In Powell, the predecessor statute, § 52-15-10, exempted 'coin-operated nonpayout pin tables with free play feature,' whereas a criminal statute, § 16-19-60 exempted 'coin-operated nonpayout machines with free play feature.' Construing the statutes in pari materia, the Court equated the coin-operated poker machines in question with coin-operated pin tables, to declare them legal. The Powell Court noted, additionally, that a 1982 amendment to § 52-15-10 exempting video games with free play feature clearly rendered the coin-operated video poker machines legal.
Exemption of the machines in Powell does not exempt any and all coin-operated nonpayout machines and all video games with free play feature. To the contrary, the legislature has specifically declared slot machines illegal in the same paragraph in which it has declared 'video games with free play feature' exempt. S.C.Code § 12-21-2710. Under the doctrine of ejusdem generis, the meaning of general words (video games) may be restricted by words of specification which precede them (slot machines) on the theory that, had the legislature intended the general words be used in their unrestricted sense, there would have been no mention of the particular class. State v. Patterson, 261 S.C. 362, 200 S.E.2d 68 (1973).
The Lucky 8 slot machines are clearly prohibited by § 12-21-2710; accordingly, the judgment below is
REVERSED.
MOORE, J. and GEORGE T. GREGORY, Jr., Acting Associate Justice, concur.
FINNEY and TOAL, JJ., dissenting in separate opinion.
FINNEY, Justice:
I respectfully dissent. In my opinion, the majority misconstrues S.C.Code Ann. § 12-21-2710 (Supp.1993) and Powell v. Red Carpet Lounge, 280 S.C. 142, 311 S.E.2d 719 (1984). I would affirm the circuit court's conclusion that possession of 'Lucky 8 Line' machines is not unlawful.
Under § 12-21-2710, it is unlawful to possess '[a]ny vending or slot machine, punch board, pull board, or other device pertaining to games of chance....' (emphasis added). The statute then goes on to exempt from its general prohibitions four different types of machines including 'video games with free play features.' Id. Since § 12-21-2710 is a penal statute, it must be strictly construed against the State and in favor of respondents. State v. Blackmon, 304 S.C. 270, 403 S.E.2d 660 (1991).
I agree with the majority that 'Lucky 8 Line' is a slot machine within the meaning of § 12-21-2710, not because it resembles a Las Vegas style slot machine nor because it requires no skill to play, but because it is 'a machine whose operation is begun by dropping a coin into a slot.' Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary 1094 (5th ed. 1974); State v. Blackmon, supra (words in a statute are given their plain and ordinary meaning); Ingram v. Bearden, 212 S.C. 399, 47 S.E.2d 833 (1948) (slot machine is one operated by deposit of a coin or thing of value) (Baker and Taylor, JJ, dissenting); Alexander v. Martin, 192 S.C. 176, 6 S.E.2d 20 (1939) (pinball machine is a slot machine); cf., State v. DeAngelis, 257 S.C. 44, 183 S.E.2d 906 (1971) (whether a 'one-armed bandit is a slot machine is a question of fact for the jury').
Arkansas
As the majority recognizes, it is well-settled that the second phrase of the statute's first paragraph creates exemptions for machines otherwise prohibited by that paragraph's first phrase. § 12-21-2710. See, e.g., Alexander Amusement Co. v. State, 246 S.C. 530, 144 S.E.2d 718 (1965); Alexander v. Martin, supra. Despite this acknowledgement, the majority holds it would be untenable to believe a 'Lucky 8 Line' slot machine is exempt as a 'video game with free play feature', relying on the doctrine of ejusdem generis. I disagree. First, as applied by the *899 majority, this doctrine would eliminate all the exemptions in § 12-21-2710. Second, since the general term in § 12-21-2710 is 'slot machine', and the more specific term 'video game with free play feature' follows this general term, ejusdem generis is simply inapplicable here. 'Lucky 8 Line' is an exempt video slot machine under § 12-21-2710.
Even if the machine were not exempt under § 12-21-2710, its possession would not be unlawful under our decision in Powell v. Red Carpet Lounge, supra. The State concedes 'Lucky 8 Line' is a coin-operated nonpayout machine with a free play feature under S.C.Code Ann. § 16-19-60 (Supp.1993). This statute exempts these machines from the criminal provisions of S.C.Code Ann. §§ 16-19-40 and -50 (1985). In Powell, we held certain machines legal because they met the statutory exception of § 16-19-60 as 'coin-operated nonpayout machines with free play features' even though they were not exempt under an earlier version of § 12-21-2710 which exempted only 'coin-operated nonpayout pin tables with free play feature.' In construing the statutes in pari materia, the Powell Court did not equate two very different statutory provisions, but rather held a machine exempt under either § 16-19-60 or § 12-21-2710 could not be prohibited under the other section. Under Powell, 'Lucky 8 Line' machines are not subject to seizure and destruction.
Possession of the machines is lawful under § 12-21-2710. Even if this were not so, possession of 'Lucky 8 Line' machines is legal under § 16-19-60. Powell, supra. I would affirm.
TOAL, J., concurs.
NOTES[1] We express no opinion as to the impact of 1993 Act No. 164. The 1993 Act was not raised prior to oral argument and we decline to consider it.
[2] The state was formerly codified as S.C.Code Ann. § 52-15-10 (1976). It was rewritten and recodified as § 12-21-2710. 1986 Act No. 308, § 4.
FROM SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT TO ZERO ENFORCEMENT …
Two months ago we filed a report on the resurgence of video poker in the Palmetto State.
In our coverage, we noted there were probably anywhere between 6,000 and 10,000 video poker machines operating in South Carolina. That number is steadily growing, we’re told.
How come? For starters, state and local law enforcement agencies continue to cut down on the number of raids launched against suspected video poker targets.
“Wide open,” one law enforcement source told us. “No enforcement happening.”
Less enforcement obviously means more opportunity for game owners and operators. Meanwhile the machines themselves have become far more advanced – able to be quickly (and remotely) rebooted so as to resemble video games that are perfectly legal.
And even when a handful of machines are seized during a rare raid, owners and operators have already factored in the losses as the “cost of doing business.”
The proliferation of video poker is most pronounced in the South Carolina Upstate, which is “free to be corrupt,” we’re told.
“The way it works is suppliers put machines out in stores,” a source familiar with the intricacies of these operations told us. “Store owners get a cut of the profits – usually fifty percent. Suppliers make the rounds every week or so and collect money.”
Every week or so … except when there’s a looming law enforcement raid.
“When they get tipped off, they go ahead of us and pick up machines before we get there – or call their clients and tell them to empty the money out,” the source added.
These “tip-offs” happen quite often, we’re told. In fact our recent story referenced five local law enforcement officers in Anderson County, S.C. who allegedly tipped off local operators to raids launched by the S.C. State Law Enforcement Division (SLED).
SLED has since pulled back its video poker efforts dramatically, due in no small part to a “near total lack of cooperation” from city and county law enforcement agencies.
(Click to view)
(Via iStock)
Video poker is illegal in South Carolina – and has been for nearly two decades. It was outlawed by order of the S.C. Supreme Court in 2000 (a decision we believe to have been reached erroneously, by the way).
Specifically, the court’s justices blocked a referendum that would have given Palmetto State residents the right to vote on video poker’s legality.
Are Slot Machines Legal In South Carolina U.s
Talk about an activist court, huh? Indeed.
“We believe voters should have had the right (to vote on video poker) … but we also believe the S.C. General Assembly is authorized to approve whatever gambling operations it wishes,” we wrote recently. “Unfortunately, sanctimonious state lawmakers prefer to rail against the ‘evils’ of gambling – even as they operate a government-run gambling monopoly.”
Sanctimoniousness and hypocrisy aside, state law expressly forbids the possession or operation of video poker machines (S.C. Code of Laws § 12-21-2710). And socially conservative lawmakers – including influential S.C. House judiciary chairman Greg Delleney – have made it clear they are in no hurry to amend the statutes.
Do we support such prohibitions? No, we do not. As libertarians, we believe in the legalization of all forms of gambling.
We also believe the current system creates a corrupt climate of selective enforcement – as we witnessed in the fallout from the infamous “Lexington Ring,” a cabal of crooked cops and corrupt politicians that was relentlessly exposed by this website five years ago.
According to our sources, the ring was (is?) “one of dozens of underground criminal networks in the Palmetto State that use video poker as a moneymaking tool.”
In the Upstate, these networks are operating with impunity. Warehouses filled with poker machines sit mere yards away from local police headquarters – with machines moved in and out in the light of day. According to our sources, Anderson, Pickens and Oconee counties are “the worst” in South Carolina when it comes to such illicit operations.
Not only that, many of the local politicians in these areas are owners (or part owners) of some of the “amusement” companies that provide these machines.
No wonder the cops look the other way, right?
“They will say ‘we specialize in entertainment machines,'” one law enforcement source told us of a typical operation. “On the surface these machines look like trivia games but they are rigged so that you have to enter a password when the machine boots up – AND you have to insert money before the poker screen comes up.”
Like unlocking a smartphone …
And like smartphones, the machines are also equipped with technology that allows them to be remotely accessed.
“When they think police are near, they have remote controls that turn off the poker games,” our source added.
Some video poker machines are also disguise their identities inside familiar arcade classics.
“They have Pot-O-Gold machines where the games are hidden with a remote control under a Super Mario Brothers or Donkey Kong game,” our source explained. “It switches between two mother boards. If you are ever in a bar with a bunch of crusty old drunks and see a Donkey Kong machine it’s probably not Donkey Kong.”
(Click to view)
(Via LyonsPinball.com)
In those instances when the games cannot be hidden or controlled remotely, other methods are used to help poker operators evade apprehension.
“They will say their clients are instructed not to pay out on any machine,” our source said. “That’s a lie, but it’s what they say. Some will also say their clients only pay out ‘store credit.’ That’s a lie, too, but it’s just as illegal even if it were true.”
Again, as we’ve stated previously – we have no problem whatsoever when it comes to legalizing video poker. Nor do we have a problem when it comes to legalizing other forms of gambling. We believe all of these games should be legalized – although from an economic standpoint it’s obviously easier to make the case for legalizing some forms of gambling (i.e. casinos on the South Carolina coast) as opposed to others (i.e. the statewide lottery).
Furthermore, it’s hard not to admire the creativity of the black market operators who run these games – and the proof they are providing us as to the vitality of the free market, which resists all attempts to be suppressed.
Having said that, the selective enforcement issue of these poker outfits remains a major concern. If local politicians and police officers are indeed in on the racket, as we’ve been told they are, then we’re not dealing with the “free market” at all – we are dealing with one in which government is restricting or permitting commerce based on bribery.
That is unacceptable …
Are Slot Machines Legal In South Carolina State
Legalize it for all (our view) … or legalize it for none.
Banner viaWildfire