Johnson v. Collins Entertainment Co.
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1Dissent
BURNETT,
Justice (dissenting):
In my opinion, the Type II and Type III video gaming machines described in the district court’s certification order constitute lotteries within the meaning of the South Carolina Constitution. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent. In offering my dissent, I recognize “[t]his Court must construe the constitution and laws of this State without concern for political or *106popular opinion.” Martin v. Condon, 324 S.C. 183, 189, 478 S.E.2d 272, 275 (1996).
QUESTIONS OF LAW
Pursuant to Rule 228, SCACR, the South Carolina Supreme Court agreed to answer the following two questions…
2Cases cited57 opinions
- Garono v. StateOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- State Ex Rel. Evans v. Brotherhood of FriendsWashington Supreme Court · 1952
- State v. HudsonWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1946
- United States v. MarderCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1995
- Commonwealth v. Two Electronic Poker Game MacHinesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
52 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.