The video gaming industry was dealt another setback
Monday when the state Supreme Court ruled the owners of seized machines don't
have a constitutional right to a jury trial to prove their games are legal.
Attorney General Henry McMaster praised the decision as a boost for law
enforcement because it means games can be evaluated immediately by a magistrate,
as opposed to waiting a year or more for docket time and a jury.
If the ruling had gone the other way, "it would have put law enforcement on
slow motion all over the state," McMaster said.
Video gambling was outlawed five years ago in South Carolina, but critics say
the industry has attempted several comebacks, mainly by introducing new games it
said were programmed to function on player skill, not chance.
State police, however, argue that most of the games still involve an element
of chance to win, making them illegal under South Carolina law.
Nearly 3,500 such machines have been seized during police raids in the last
two years, taken from bars, private clubs and convenience stores throughout the
state. Many offered payouts in merchandise or more chances to play the game.
Monday's 5-0 ruling is based on a Berkeley County case in which the State Law
Enforcement Division seized a Safari Skill video game belonging to Mims
Amusement Co. from an area sports bar. A magistrate ruled it was an illegal
gambling device and ordered it destroyed.
Mims appealed, claiming the company had a right to a jury trial because the
confiscation amounted to civil forfeiture of property.
Mims received a favorable ruling at the circuit court level, where a judge
said the owner is entitled to a review of his peers when a factual dispute
exists about the legality of a particular gaming machine.
In overturning the ruling, the high court said a video gambling machine has
only illegal purposes under South Carolina law.
"We conclude that a seized video gaming machine constitutes contraband per se
in the nature of a roulette wheel," the court said.
Mims' attorney, James Griffin of Columbia, said his client is disappointed by
the decision because it gives county magistrates the authority to determine what
constitutes a game of skill versus a game of chance.
Anti-gambling advocates said that if the court had sided with the gaming
industry, its lawyers could have extended the life of the controversial games by
repeatedly seeking jury trials on every brand of game they produce.
"They wanted to litigate endlessly," said anti-gambling attorney Richard
Gergel. "They didn't care if they won or lost, they just wanted to tie you up."
McMaster declined to speculate on whether there would be a new round of
crackdowns on gaming machines, saying that decision is up to law enforcement.
During its peak, the state had more than 33,000 video poker machines set up
across the state. The industry was dissolved in 2000 after a court challenge.
Schuyler Kropf covers courts and legal issues. Contact him at skropf@postandcourier.com or
937-5551.
