From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

City of Orangeburg v. Carter

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jan 21, 1991
400 S.E.2d 140 (S.C. 1991)

Opinion

23310

Heard April 15, 1990.

Decided January 21, 1991.

James F. Walsh, Jr., Orangeburg, for appellant. Bradley C. Hutto, of Williams Williams, Orangeburg, and Reese I. Joye, Jr., North Charleston, for respondent.


Heard April 15, 1990.

Decided Jan. 21, 1991.


Respondent was convicted in municipal court of first offense driving under the influence (DUI) under S.C. Code Ann. § 56-5-2930 (Supp. 1989). He was fined $268.00. On appeal, the circuit court reversed the conviction. We reverse.

First, the circuit court held respondent's arrest was illegal because the arresting officer had no probable cause to stop him within city limits. To the contrary, the record indicates the officer observed respondent make an improper left turn within city limits establishing probable cause to stop. See State v. Goodstein, 278 S.C. 125, 292 S.E.2d 791 (1982); State v. Parker, 271 S.C. 159, 245 S.E.2d 904 (1978).

Second, the circuit court held the trial judge's refusal to charge that the City must prove both a mental and physical impairment in order to establish DUI was reversible error. We disagree. The trial judge adequately charged the jury that DUI is established by proof the defendant's ability to drive was materially and appreciably impaired. See Dixon v. Weir Fuel Co., 251 S.C. 74, 160 S.E.2d 194 (1968).

Accordingly, the judgment of the circuit court is reversed and respondent's conviction is reinstated.

Reversed.

HARWELL, CHANDLER, FINNEY and TOAL, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

City of Orangeburg v. Carter

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jan 21, 1991
400 S.E.2d 140 (S.C. 1991)
Case details for

City of Orangeburg v. Carter

Case Details

Full title:CITY OF ORANGEBURG, Appellant v. Angus F. CARTER, III, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of South Carolina

Date published: Jan 21, 1991

Citations

400 S.E.2d 140 (S.C. 1991)
400 S.E.2d 140

Citing Cases

State v. Salisbury

In the instant case, there was sufficient direct evidence establishing the elements of DUI and the identity…

State v. Knuckles

Even before section 56-5-2930 was amended, driving under the influence was established by proof that the…