Author Archive

Blog

“Spartanburg Circuit Judge Agrees with Dismissal of DUI Charge”

CASE NAME: South Carolina v Taylor; Docket Number 2016-CP-42-2066; October 20, 2016

FACTS:

On June 11, 2015, at approximately 4:35 a.m., Lance Corporal R.B. Thornton of the South Carolina Highway Patrol responded to a call regarding a vehicle in a ditch on Nahant Street off of Hayne Street in Spartanburg County. Upon arriving on scene, Lance Corporal Thornton was met by Deputy Woodward of the Spartanburg County Sheriff’s Office, who had placed a call to the South Carolina Highway Patrol for assistance after locating the vehicle.

Janssen vs. Minnesota Commissioner of Public Safety

Minnesota Court of Appeals Issues Latest ‘Implied Consent’ Court Opinion

CASE NAME: Janssen vs. Minnesota Commissioner of Public Safety (Minnesota Court of Appeals; Opinion No. : A16099; August 22, 2016)

FACTS:

Appellant David Janssen was arrested for driving while intoxicated (DWI). A preliminary breath test indicated an alcohol concentration of 0.196. After the impliedconsent advisory was read to him, appellant agreed to take a breath test. The first sample resulted in an alcohol concentration of 0.174, the second in an alcohol concentration of 0.167. Appellant’s driver’s license was revoked for a year and his license plates were impounded because his alcohol concentration was “twice the legal limit [of 0.08] or more 3 as measured at the time or within two hours of the time of the offense.” Minn. Stat. § 169A.54, subd. 1(3)(iii) (2014); see also Minn. Stat. § 169A.60, subd. 1(d)(3) (2014) (providing that driving with an alcohol concentration twice the legal limit or more is a “plate impoundment violation”).

“Can the Police Get My Medical Records?”

This topic or question often comes up when we represent clients accused of DUI/Drunk Driving that have been involved in an accident and have been taken to a hospital and are charged with DUI in the process.  Most of the time our clients have refused to provide a blood sample for testing when requested by the police officer – but can the police subsequently go back and try to obtain a copy of the medical records and see if the hospital ran a blood alcohol test on their own during treatment?

“Emma’s Law” (S.137) clears first hurdle and is unanimously voted out of the South Carolina House of Representative Criminal Law Subcommittee.

On March 20, 2014, a key subcommittee hearing related to the potential passage of South Carolina Senate Bill S.137 (a/k/a Emma’s Law) was held at the South Carolina Legislature. The hearing was well attended and many voices were present urging the subcommittee to pass “Emma’s Law.”  S.137 has been renamed “Emma’s Law” due to the tragic death of the child Emma Longstreet at the hands of a multiple and repeat drunk driving offender in Columbia last year.  Her unfortunate death has galvanized community support for the passage of S.137.  Debbie Ware, statewide chairman for MADD, emphasized that, according to several national studies, 67 percent of failed drunk driving collisions involve a repeat offender; and additionally, a repeat drunk driving offender is eight times more likely to be involved in a failed DUI accident than a driver with only one prior DUI conviction.  After hearing testimony from various citizens, the subcommittee voted 5-0 to send “Emma’s Law” onto the full House of Representatives Criminal Law Committee for its consideration.  Most observers believed that “Emma’s Law” will be fully endorsed by the South Carolina House of Representatives, the South Carolina Senate and will be signed into law by Governor Haley before the end of the 2014 session.

Recent Results

July 2017

  • State v. E.Y.S.

    • Charge: DUI, Failure to Maintain Lane, Speeding
    • Court: Greenville County Magistrate Court
    • Facts: Client was stopped for Failure to Maintain Lane
    • Result: DUI and Failure to Maintain Lane dismissed; Client receives ticket for “Speeding”
  • State v. W.P.C.

    • Charge: DUI, Driving Left of Center
    • Court: Mauldin Municipal Court
    • Facts: Client was pulled over for Driving Left of Center
    • Result: DUI and Driving Left of Center dismissed; Client receives ticket for “Reckless Driving”
  • State v. J.C.H

    • Charge: DUI
    • Court: Mauldin Municipal Court
    • Facts: Client was pulled over for Failure to Maintain Lane
    • Result: DUI dismissed; Client receives tickets for “Public Disorderly Conduct” and “Improper Backing”
  • State v. A.J.R

    • Charge: DUI
    • Court: Fountain Inn Municipal Court
    • Facts: Client was pulled over for speeding
    • Result: DUI dismissed; Client receives ticket for “Reckless Driving”
  • State v. J.M.M.

    • Charge: DUI
    • Court: Greenville County Magistrate Court
    • Facts: Client was involved in a two-vehicle collision
    • Result: DUI dismissed; Client receives a ticket for “Reckless Driving”
  • State v. P.J.K.

    • Charge: DUI
    • Court: Greenville Municipal Court
    • Facts: Client was pulled over for front left tire damage
    • Result: DUI dismissed; Client receives ticket for “Reckless Driving”
  • State v. L.H.J.

    • Charge: DUI, Speeding, Failure to Maintain Lane
    • Court: Greenville County Magistrate Court
    • Facts: Client was pulled over for speeding
    • Result: DUI, Speeding, and Failure to Maintain Lane dismissed; Client receives a ticket for “Reckless Driving”
  • State v. K.A.M.

    • Charge: DUI, Failure to Maintain Lane
    • Court: Greenville County Magistrate Court
    • Facts: Client was pulled over for Failure to Maintain Lane
    • Result: DUI and Failure to Maintain Lane dismissed; Client receives ticket for “Reckless Driving”
  • State v. D.K.R.

    • Charge: DUI
    • Court: Spartanburg Magistrate Court
    • Facts: An anonymous call was received about the vehicle
    • Result: DUI dismissed; Client receives ticket for “Reckless Driving”
  • State v. C.M.E.

    • Charge: DUI, Hit and Run, Seatbelt ticket
    • Court: Greenville Magistrate Court
    • Facts: Client was involved in a motor vehicle collision
    • Result: DUI dismissed; Client receives ticket for “Reckless Driving”
  • State v. S.W.J.

    • Charge: DUI, No DL in Possession
    • Court: Greenville Magistrate Court
    • Facts: Anonymous call was received about the vehicle
    • Result: DUI and No DL in Possession were dismissed; Client receives ticket for “Reckless Driving”
  • State v. L.W.T.

    • Charge: DUI
    • Court: Spartanburg Magistrate Court
    • Facts: CClient was pulled over for running a red light
    • Result: DUI dismissed

Steve Sumner

  • 112 Manly Street
  • Greenville, SC 29601
  • Phone
  • (864) 235-3834
  • Fax
  • (864) 233-8781

Contact Us