Categories

Inside a plain-looking government building tucked away among the trees along 21st Avenue North are magistrates’ courtrooms where lives are changed forever. You can get what amounts to a scarlet letter on your record, a DUI conviction which will stay with you for life.

But a WMBF News investigation shows that when someone arrested for DUI pleads guilty to a lesser charge, like Surfside Mayor Allen Deaton, there is no scarlet letter. His DUI arrest and thousands of others are deleted from the court’s computers. It’s the law.

In videotape WMBF News obtained of Mayor Deaton’s field sobriety test during a traffic stop in January 2010, you can see him going through the exercises, such as lifting one foot, and later he’s taken away in handcuffs.

The mayor denied he was drunk and prosecutors say they couldn’t prove he was.

Deaton pleaded guilty to going 60 in a 45mph zone. So now when you enter his name into the court’s computer system it’s as if that DUI arrest never happened. (Note: Click on “Summary Court” and hit “agree” once the webpage comes up. To see the Surfside mayor’s cases, you must use his legal name Kemp Allen Deaton or K. Allen Deaton.)

It’s like that for anyone in South Carolina who’s accused of DUI but pleads guilty to something else.

“It seems a little crazy to me,” said Tom Leath, the city manager of Myrtle Beach. He hires city attorneys to prosecute first-time offenders arrested for DUI within city limits. “But they passed a law. The law’s in place. Charges are expunged. We don’t know about ‘em. They never happened as far as we’re concerned.”
read more…

ANDERSON — Despite tougher laws, drunken drivers still are responsible for accidents that claim hundreds of lives throughout South Carolina each year. That’s why police officers and deputies from six Upstate law enforcement agencies are honing their DUI-enforcement skills at a training program in Anderson this week.

“This training is set up to show how to detect DUI suspects on the road,” said Anderson police officer Eddie McCall, one of the organizers of the four-day course.

The most recent statistics show that 463 alcohol-related fatalities occurred on South Carolina roads in 2008. McCall said South Carolina is routinely one of the leading states for alcohol-related accidents. He also said Anderson County is typically among the worst counties in the state in terms of DUI carnage.

“We just like to drink around here,” McCall said.

A series of stricter DUI laws took effect last year in South Carolina, where motorists are considered to be legally intoxicated if their blood-alcohol level is .08 or higher.

The laws include more severe penalties for motorists with even higher blood-alcohol levels. For a first DUI offense, a driver will face a minimum $400 fine and a jail sentence of 48 hours to 30 days, or 48 hours of community service. But if the driver’s blood-alcohol level is between .10 and .16, the fine climbs to $500 with a jail sentence of 72 hours to 30 days, or 72 hours of community service. If a motorist’s blood-alcohol level is .16 or higher, the penalty for a first offense includes a $1,000 fine and a jail sentence of 30 to 90 days, or 30 days of community service.

Drivers found guilty of DUI for a fourth time will be sentenced to prison for anywhere from one to seven years, depending on their blood-alcohol level.

South Carolina also was one of the first states to require the videotaping of DUI arrests.

Proponents say these new laws and stepped-up enforcement efforts have led to more DUI arrests and fewer alcohol-related fatalities.

The Anderson Police Department has spent $170,000 from a federal grant during the past two years to create a two-officer DUI unit. Since the unit was formed, the officers have made 197 DUI arrests, a department spokesman, Tony Tilley, said Wednesday.

But to obtain a DUI conviction, law enforcement officers must carefully follow specific procedures, said Marty Perkins, one of the instructors who spoke at the training course Wednesday.

“Don’t be in a hurry,” said Perkins, a former police officer from Fishers, Ind., who now frequently testifies as a defense expert witness in DUI trials. “Follow the guidelines.”

A total of 16 officers and deputies from the Anderson Police Department, Anderson County Sheriff’s Office, Laurens Police Department, Oconee County Sheriff’s Office, Pickens County Sheriff’s Office and Simpsonville Police Department are attending this week’s course. In addition to hearing from experts, they have spent time practicing standard field sobriety tests on volunteers.

Source

Arrests across South Carolina for driving under the influence are way up, road fatalities are way down and there’s disagreement as to why.

Spartanburg Solicitor Trey Gowdy told The GreenvilleNewshe believes the drop in highway deaths shows the latest reforms to the state’s DUI laws are working.

“I would say it’s a suc­cess,” he said. Others point to in­creased DUI arrests as well as an increase in seat-belt use by South Carolina driv­ers as the cause of the re­duced deaths. Joe McCulloch, a Colum­bia defense lawyer who has handled DUI cases for 30 years, said the new law has simply been a fundraising tool for state governmentat the expense of the rights of thosewhomight have been drinking but are innocent of DUI.

McCulloch said the in­creased DUI arrests are the result of more troopers being hired and a policy now being used nationwide of saturation arrests.

“Essentially, throw that net out, catch as many fish as you can,” he said officers and troopers are told.

“Even if you catch some who are innocent, it will all get sorted out at the jury. Officers are being told they need to err on the side of caution and not on the side of the presumption of inno­cence and that’s problem­atic.”

Mark Keel, director of the state Department of Public Safety, which over­sees the Highway Patrol, said every trooper must meet probable cause be­fore an arrest. However, he said it is true that law enfor­cement agencies are work­ing with local law enforce­ment officers using satura­tion arrests.

“It is part of the deterrent strategy,” he said.

DUI arrests by troopers are up by almost 20 percent since the new law went into effect in February 2009. DUI arrests since 2008 have increased by more than 4,000, or 32 percent, according to Public Safety records.

Keel said local law enfor­cement agencies also re­port significant increases. In fact, he said, the law en­forcement network that works with the Highway Patrol has already reached the DUI arrest numbers for all of last year.

That comes as road fatal­ities have dropped sharply. As of last week, there were 89 fewer crashes and 99 fewer people killed in road accidents year to date com­pared with the same period last year.

Deaths are also down significantly during the “100 deadly days of sum­mer,” a time period during which law enforcement of­ficials say a large number of people die in road acci­dents.
read more…

During the month of July, Conway police officers will be stepping up enforcement of DUI laws.

Alcohol is a major factor in fatal crashes during the July 4th holiday.

In 2008, 32 percent of all drivers involved in traffic related crashes during the holiday weekend possessed a blood alcohol concentration of .08 or higher.

During this year’s holiday period, Conway police will conduct aggressive patrol for DUI enforcement and reminding everyone that “Buzzed Driving is Drunk Driving”.

Drivers can enjoy a safe and festive holiday without jeopardizing their lives and the lives of others who may be on the road.

In need of an attorney in South Carolina?

Source

A 23-year-old woman is facing several charges after Myrtle Beach police allege she bit, kicked and spit at two officers during a DUI arrest on Sunday evening.

The suspect, of Myrtle Beach, was stopped by Myrtle Beach Police just after 5:30 p.m. Sunday along 8th Avenue North and Ocean Boulevard on suspicion of driving under the influence. Police say she admitted she had four mixed drinks before taking a partial sobriety test along the road.

Halfway through her field sobriety test, police report the suspect became extremely combative and refused to complete the tasks ordered by police. Because she refused to complete the test, she was taken into custody for driving under the influence.

During her arrest, a report states the 23-year-old became very combative with the arresting officers. Police say the suspect  grabbed one officer by the hair and refused to let go, while attempting to kick, scratch and bite a second officer. A tazer was used on the woman twice before she calmed down and was placed under arrest.

The suspect now faces charges for driving under the influence, resisting arrest and two counts of assaulting a police officer.

Source

Four months after South Carolina stiffened the penalty for drinking and driving, law enforcement says it’s still too early to gauge its impact.

Aiken County South Carolina DUI

So far, the South Carolina Highway Patrol says it has seen a few more DUI arrests in Aiken County compared to the same period last year. Since the law took effect, state troopers have made 86 cases involving impaired drivers on state highways in Aiken County, 39 of which involved collisions. For the same time frame last year, the department made 66 DUI cases, 24 involving collisions.

South Carolina DUI Stats

This year’s statewide figures weren’t readily available, but last year the percentage of DUI-related deaths in crashes increased, according to state statistics. In 2008, of the 914 people killed on South Carolina highways, 461 — about 50 percent — were involved in DUI-related accidents. In 2007, alcohol-related accidents resulted in 463 — or 43 percent — of the 1,077 traffic deaths, according to safety officials.

Columbia County, South Carolina DUI

Across the river, DUI arrests have been holding steady for the past year. In Columbia County, sheriff’s Capt. Steve Morris said his department made 289 DUI arrests for all of 2008. So far this year, it has had 135 arrests.

Richmond County, South Carolina DUI

In Richmond County, the numbers are higher, with 1,511 DUI arrests in 2007, 1,485 in 2008 and 647 so far this year, said sheriff’s Maj. Richard Weaver.

Source

The woman the South Carolina highway Patrol charged with felony driving under the influence with death Saturday, posted bond Sunday.

Troopers charged Donna Marie Sheedy, 60, of Myrtle Beach after a motorcyclist died in a crash near the Highway 544 and Dick Pond Road intersection just after 10 p.m. Friday.

The Highway Patrol said Sheedy’s car crossed the center line and hit two motorcycles and a truck, killing a biker.

Horry County coroner Robert Edge identified the biker as Kenneth J. Temple of Centereach, New York.

A county magistrate set Sheedy’s bond Sunday at $100,000 and ordered her held on GPS monitoring while she awaits trial on the charge.

Sheedy remains jailed while jail officials wait on a GPS monitoring device to arrive.
New York Traffic Attorneys

Source

The recent Greenville News headline, “Drunken drivers to see stiffer penalties,” was right on the mark. And reporter Paul Alongi’s following story well described how the new South Carolina DUI law more often will result in convictions and emphatic punishment of those caught driving under the influence.

What’s behind this development is widespread public abhorrence and political anger at the bloody toll of drunk drivers on South Carolina highways.

During 2007, the last year for which complete numbers are available, there were 463 alcohol related deaths on our state roads, up 10.5 percent over the previous year according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

That rising toll and the still higher numbers of injured and crippled and grieving survivors account for the harshness of the new law.

And harsh it is. First offenders may get off with a fine or brief stay in jail. But repeated convictions mandate — not allow, but require — time behind bars. Depending on a drunk driver’s blood alcohol reading and his number of offenses, the time ranges up to seven years in prison.

That’s time behind bars for conviction of driving under the influence without a chargeable accident.

What goes into the law enforcement process and what comes out of the judicial process frequently are different. For one thing, prosecutors often reduce charges in exchange for guilty pleas to unclog trial dockets. Even so, and even counting on increased defense lawyering, judges who are ordinarily faithful to their oath are going to send a rising tide of errant and hapless drinkers behind bars.

That said, and applauded by many, a single line in the recent news story needs more attention. Referring to those convicted of DUI, it added, “They will also be required to seek treatment.”

Treatment for what? For alcoholism, which is designated by the American Medical Association and the American Society of Addiction Medicine as a primary, chronic, progressive and fatal disease.

This disease, addiction to alcohol, is rampant among hard-core drunk drivers, those repeat offenders who regularly blow more than twice the legal limit on blood alcohol measuring devices. And even after they’re repeatedly caught and punished they still drink and drive.

That shouldn’t surprise. Alcoholics cannot not drink. Their addiction is medically evident in brain imaging, and more practically and almost as certainly by clinical assessment at one of South Carolina’s 33 state legislated alcohol and drug abuse treatment centers.

The number of this state’s drunk drivers who are alcoholic, who are not just irresponsible party goers or solo drinkers to occasional excess, isn’t known. But there should be a focused and compounded public interest in the difference between alcoholics and merely irresponsible drinkers.

Non-alcoholics punished for driving under the influence are usually impressed not to repeat the mistake. By contrast, alcoholics will drink and drive and menace others repeatedly, even after incarceration. They deserve not only punishment, they also need treatment for future protection of the public.

Thanks in large part to the persistence of Dan Sharpe, retired director of Pickens County Behavioral Health Services, the new law requires all who are convicted of DUI to now submit to clinical assessment and clinically determined treatment at one of the state approved treatment centers. The assessments will channel alcoholics into 3-to-4 months of intensive outpatient therapy, and into essential aftercare in the better treatment programs.

Alcoholism can’t be cured. But like diabetes and hypertension it can be arrested. Professional treatment can put alcoholics on the path to self-sustained abstinence. And serious support groups — the best known of which are found in the 12-step program of Alcoholics Anonymous — can help them continue that journey and perhaps never drink again.

There are nearly a hundred AA meetings a week in the Greenville area. All are open to people seeking a way to stop drinking. And more than a dozen weekly meetings are open to the public, with anonymity expected, at the non-profit Alano Club on Catalina Drive.

A concern for South Carolina’s public treatment services is that for budget reasons our Legislature may move them under purview of the mental health establishment whose federal treatment model addresses alcoholism chiefly with thinking skills development. This is a researched and evidently effective therapeutic approach, but in my opinion it lacks a serious moral component, and is without the spiritual dimension which animates 12-step programs and nurtures long-term sobriety.

There’s room for debate about treatment models. The test of their worth under South Carolina’s new DUI law is whether they result in alcoholic drivers getting sober, staying sober and not driving drunk again.
Source

South Carolina’s new DUI laws has tiers of penalties based on an offenders blood alcohol level and the number of offenses. Those tiers and penalties are outlined below:

(1) for a first offense, by a fine of four hundred dollars or imprisonment for not less than forty-eight hours nor more than thirty days. However, in lieu of the forty-eight hour minimum imprisonment, the court may provide for forty-eight hours of public service employment. The minimum forty-eight hour imprisonment or public service employment must be served at a time when the person is not working and does not interfere with his regular employment under terms and conditions the court considers proper. However, the court may not compel an offender to perform public service employment in lieu of the minimum forty-eight hour sentence. If the person’s alcohol concentration is at least ten one-hundredths of one percent but less than sixteen one-hundredths of one percent, then the person must be punished by a fine of five hundred dollars or imprisonment for not less than seventy-two hours nor more than thirty days. However, in lieu of the seventy-two hour minimum imprisonment, the court may provide for seventy-two hours of public service employment. The minimum seventy-two hour imprisonment or public service employment must be served at a time when the person is not working and does not interfere with his regular employment under terms and conditions as the court considers proper. However, the court may not compel an offender to perform public service employment in lieu of the minimum sentence. If the person’s alcohol concentration is sixteen one-hundredths of one percent or more, then the person must be punished by a fine of one thousand dollars or imprisonment for not less than thirty days nor more than ninety days. However, in lieu of the thirty-day minimum imprisonment, the court may provide for thirty days of public service employment. The minimum thirty days imprisonment or public service employment must be served at a time when the person is not working and does not interfere with his regular employment under terms and conditions as the court considers proper. However, the court may not compel an offender to perform public service employment instead of the thirty-day minimum sentence. Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 22-3-540, 22-3-545, and 22-3-550, a first offense charged for this item may be tried in magistrates court;

(2) for a second offense, by a fine of not less than two thousand one hundred dollars nor more than five thousand one hundred dollars, and imprisonment for not less than five days nor more than one year. However, the fine imposed by this item must not be suspended in an amount less than one thousand one hundred dollars. If the person’s alcohol concentration is at least ten one-hundredths of one percent but less than sixteen one-hundredths of one percent, then the person must be punished by a fine of not less than two thousand five hundred dollars nor more than five thousand five hundred dollars and imprisonment for not less than thirty days nor more than two years. However, the fine imposed by this item must not be suspended in an amount less than one thousand one hundred dollars. If the person’s alcohol concentration is sixteen one-hundredths of one percent or more, then the person must be punished by a fine of not less than three thousand five hundred dollars nor more than six thousand five hundred dollars and imprisonment for not less than ninety days nor more than three years. However, the fine imposed by this item must not be suspended in an amount less than one thousand one hundred dollars;

(3) for a third offense, by a fine of not less than three thousand eight hundred dollars nor more than six thousand three hundred dollars, and imprisonment for not less than sixty days nor more than three years. If the person’s alcohol concentration is at least ten one-hundredths of one percent but less than sixteen one-hundredths of one percent, then the person must be punished by a fine of not less than five thousand dollars nor more than seven thousand five hundred dollars and imprisonment for not less than ninety days nor more than four years. If the person’s alcohol concentration is sixteen one-hundredths of one percent or more, then the person must be punished by a fine of not less than seven thousand five hundred dollars nor more than ten thousand dollars and imprisonment for not less than six months nor more than five years; or

(4) for a fourth or subsequent offense, by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than five years. If the person’s alcohol concentration is at least ten one-hundredths of one percent but less than sixteen one-hundredths of one percent, then the person must be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years nor more than six years. If the person’s alcohol concentration is sixteen one-hundredths of one percent or more, then the person must be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years nor more than seven years.

Information from the South Carolina Code.

The Loris Police Department was among eight law enforcement agencies chosen to receive a new police vehicle to use in traffic enforcement.

The department will get a new Dodge Charger police vehicle as part of the Law Enforcement Challenge program, in which more than 160 agencies throughout the state participated in from Dec. 14, 2007 to Sept.

The winning departments were chose during a random drawing on Wednesday, but to be eligible to win a vehicle, police departments had to participate in enforcement activities such as seat belt enforcement, slow down speeders and reduce impaired and aggressive driving.

Other winning departments were Spartanburg County Sheriff’s Office; Branchville Police Department; Lee County Sheriff’s Office; Travelers Rest Police Department; Anderson Police Department; Chester Police Department and Summerton Police Department.

“Because these vehicles will be used strictly for traffic enforcement, the communities that these agencies serve are the true winners,” said Mark Keel, director of the state’s public safety department. “High-visibility patrols are instrumental in reducing traffic collisions, which in turn saves lives.”

read more…