Why did the South Carolina AG rescind its earlier approval of the Chess Challenge video machine?

Plain-English summary

In April 2002, the South Carolina AG had said a Chess Challenge video machine as presented for review appeared outside the gambling-machine ban, while warning that small changes could make distributed versions illegal. State agents later seized a machine whose operation differed from the one reviewed. In a July 2002 letter, the AG rescinded the April opinion and found the seized Chess Challenge machine an illegal game of chance under the statute.

The later review found that pressing a button did not give the player meaningful control over rapidly rotating chess images. A roulette-style border stopped independently of the player. Matching images produced further credits, but chance determined whether that happened. The AG called the machine contraband per se and subject to seizure.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2002. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Was the April 2002 favorable Chess Challenge opinion still effective? A: No. This letter expressly rescinded it after the office examined the seized machine.

Q: Did the AG treat the stop buttons as proof of skill?
A: No. The images moved too quickly for the buttons to control the outcome, and the border feature was outside the player's control.

Q: What consequence did the AG identify?
A: The opinion described the machine as prohibited contraband and subject to the statute's seizure provision.

Background and statutory framework

The letter applied § 12-21-2710 to the seized machine's actual operation and cited Section 12-21-2712 as its seizure provision. The reversal depended on the differences between the machine initially presented and the one distributed and seized.

Citations and references

• § 12-21-2710: prohibited gaming devices.
• Section 12-21-2712: seizure provision.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/july-25-2002-2/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/02july-25-stewart.pdf

Original opinion text

The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
CHARLES M . CONDON
ATTORNEY GENERAL

I
i,

July 25, 2002

Robert M. Stewart, Chief
South Carolina Law Enforcement Division
Post Office Box 21398
Columbia, South Carolina 29221-1398
Re: "Chess Challenge" Video Gaming Machine Determined to be Illegal Per Se Dear Chief Stewart: As you know, by letter dated April 23, 2002, this Office provided an opm10n to Representative Shirley Hinson regarding the Chess Challenge video gaming machine. In that Jetter, We opined that "[g]iven the specific set up of the machine we reviewed ... the machine ... appears not to fall within the prohibitions of Section 12-21-2710 and thus would not be subject to seizure." In addition, we advised " ... that relatively minor changes could be made in this game which would transform the machine into an illegal per se game of chance [which would make] the analysis ... inapplicable." We warned that "should it become known that the machines which are ultimately distributed in South Carolina have been so altered or made capable of such alteration, this Office will advise law enforcement that the machines are subject to immediate seizure pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. Section 12-21-2712."

ff&

rJ

Now, unfortunately, the alterations to the machine contemplated in the April 23, 2002 opinion have come to pass. Subsequent to the issuing of the April 23 opinion, agents with the State Law Enforcement Division seized a Chess Challenge machine as the result of a violation of South Carolina's gambling laws. I have been able to review operation of the seized machine with SLED Captain Stacy Drakeford. It is clear that both the manner and mode of operation of the Chess Challenge machine have been altered, thus rendering this machine an illegal game of chance. The operation of the seized Chess Challenge machine can be described briefly as follows: The machine is activated by pressing a start button. The middle of the video screen displays images (various animated chess characters] that rotate in four (4) separate columns. The player can stop the columns all at the same time by pressing a single button or the player can stop each column individually by pressing a button which corresponds to the particular column. Once all columns have been stopped, the machine then triggers a carousel or roulette-style feature which forms a border around the screen. The border consists of panels containing the same images as may appear in the columns in the middle of the screen . The machine will eventually stop and will illuminate a R EMBERT

c. D ENNIS B UJLJ)ING

•

POST OFFICE Box

11 549

•

COLUM BI A. S.C. 2921 1- J549

•

TELEPHONE: 803-734-3970

•

F ACSI MILE: 803-253-6283

Chief Stewart
Page 2
July 25, 2002

panel containing a chess-type animated character. If a combination of images matches in the columns and/or the border, the operator receives additional credits which allow for further play. Although the player may have some ability to control the length of time the images rotate in the columns, the images spin in such a manner that skill or manual dexterity plays no part in determining the combination of characters which appear. Further, the rotation and subsequent cessation of the carousel or roulette-style feature is totally beyond the control of the player.

I

I.

Clearly, chance ratherthan skill determines the outcome of the seized Chess Challenge video machine. It is further clear that the machine which was the subject of the April 23, 2002 opinion is capable of being easily transformed into the seized Chess Challenge machine. Therefore, as this Office earlier warned, the analysis employed in the April 23, 2002 opinion is now inapplicable. Accordingly, this Office is compelled to rescind the April 23, 2002 opinion. Thus, we advise that it is the opinion of this Office that the Chess Challenge video machine is an illegal game of chance, prohibited as contraband per se by S.C. Code Ann. § 12-21-2710. Our Supreme Court has clearly stated that such machines are inherently illegal and subject to immediate confiscation. State v. 192 Coin-Operated Video Games, 338 S.C. 176, 525 S.E.2d 872 (2000). As such, Chess Challenge machines are subject to the seizure provisions of Section 12-21-2712.

I

David K. Avant
Assistant Attorney General
cc:

The Honorable Shirley R. Hinson
Member, House of Representatives
306-A Blatt Building
Columbia, South Carolina 29211