South Carolina Criminal Defense Blog

Retha Pierce was arrested for DUI Sunday night in Conway, S.C. Although she had prescription drugs on her, her breathalyzer result was 0.00. According to the article, she refused a urinalysis because they would not allow her to retain half of the sample to be tested by an independent lab (not the way it's done, but doesn't sound like an unreasonable request under the circumstances).

Ms. Pierce seems to be a magnet for police - the question is whether her actions attract them or whether she is a victim of police harassment.

"[Horry County police] are lying again as usual," said Pierce.

"This is Horry County trying to take care of Retha Pierce. I was on my way from church and they put me in jail overnight. Talking about a DUI, knowing I don't drink," Pierce went on to say . . .

"[Horry County police] are always setting me up in this county and always trying to make Atlantic Beach look in a negative light. But thank GOD he knows the full truth here," Pierce said."

Representative Thad Viers was charged with First Degree Harassment today in Myrtle Beach, accused of stalking an ex girlfriend.

According to the incident report, Viers' ex-girlfriend broke off their relationship and Viers continued to "call, text, email and show up at the victim's home."

The incident reports states the victim previously contacted Myrtle Beach Police Department but was "reluctant to press the issue because she didn't want to injure the offender's reputation."

The report states that in December the victim was contacted by email and was texted by the offender through a mutual acquaintance's cell phone.

The victim also stated her attorney sent no-contact demands via courier. The victim's father also sent written no-contact demands when returning sporting event tickets the offender sent.

This is Viers' second arrest for similar conduct - in June 2007 he pled no-contest to a charge of unlawful communication for allegedly threatening his ex-wife's boyfriend:

"He made various phone calls, some threatening violence, some relating to sexual acts. He mentioned some specific things about where the victim lived and some things about the victim's mother, which caused the victim to fear for his safety," Todd Wagoner, prosecutor, told the court at the hearing.

Viers is an attorney in Horry County, and has served as representative in the State Congress for five terms. His website states that he is proud to have helped to write a controversial and racist immigration law, parts of which were recently struck down as unconstitutional by a federal court. Similar anti-immigrant laws have been held unconstitutional in Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Indiana and Utah.

Viers announced that he is withdrawing from the 2012 Congressional race:

"As of today, I am withdrawing from the race for South Carolina’s new 7th Congressional District due to personal reasons, and I will not be a candidate for any office in 2012. While I had hoped to join South Carolina’s conservative congressional delegation in fighting back against Washington’s out-of-control spending spree, now is not the time. Instead, I will focus on building my law practice and advocating free market principles here in Horry County," Viers said through an e-mailed statement released Friday afternoon.

Some observations from a roster meeting for Horry County Central Jury Court last week:

- There are a whole lot of civil lawyers sitting in the courtroom, sign of the times? When the real estate market goes south, suddenly there is a new group of "DUI/ traffic lawyers" in town.

- For the civil lawyers: some things you can negotiate at a roster meeting in CJC and some things you can't. Just set your cases for trial, that's the point of a roster meeting in central jury court. The municipal courts are different.

- I have a client who was charged with kidnapping and criminal domestic violence of a high and aggravated nature four years ago. We asked for a trial. They remanded it to magistrate court as a criminal domestic violence first offense. We asked for a trial. They sent it back to General Sessions as a CDVHAN. We asked for a trial. They remanded it to magistrate court again as a CDV first offense. We asked for a trial. Then filed a motion to dismiss for violation of my client's right to a speedy trial. At the roster meeting, just before the motion is scheduled to be heard, the assistant solicitor tells me that they have sent the case back to General Sessions as a CDVHAN. My client is tired of the games.

- If you are pro-se you are probably not going to get a continuance. Doesn't hurt to try, though.

- If you are pro-se and ask for a public defender you are probably not going to get any help from the court. The U.S. Supreme Court has said that you are entitled to an attorney on a lower court charge only if you are sentenced to jail time. Which means you don't know if you are entitled to an attorney until after you've been sentenced, at which point you can file an appeal. Of course, you probably would not know this unless you had an attorney to tell you. Also, our chief justice has instructed the magistrates not to give you an attorney.

- Former Circuit Court judges suffer through roster meetings like everyone else, when they take on a traffic case.

- It seems like more people are representing themselves and requesting jury trials pro se. Another sign of the times?

- It always amazes me when an attorney stands up at a roster meeting and announces that he/she has had no contact with their client and does not know where they are, then moves to be relieved from their case. I am assuming that the client paid them to represent them on the charge - now the attorney doesn't know where they are so they will throw the client to the wolves? So far when I've had this happen, the prosecutor assumes I will ask to be relieved, and I have told them that I will try the case in the client's absence if necessary. Maybe I'm doing it wrong.

"A public safety officer at the South Carolina Department of Mental Health has been charged with carrying on an inappropriate relationship with a patient being treated as a sexual predator." The officer was charged with having sexually explicit phone calls with a "patient" in the sexually violent predator "treatment" program at SCDC.

A Sumter police officer has been arrested and charged with stealing money that he took from a person who found the money, called and reported it, and turned it in to him. The officer says he is being charged in retaliation for speaking out after his supervisor assaulted him.

Horry County Police Department's problems following County Council's receipt of an anonymous letter alleging misconduct are still ongoing. County Administrator John Weaver did his own investigation of the allegations in the letter, and has concluded that eight of the nine allegations are unfounded. The ninth was an allegation of thefts from the evidence room.

Other council members felt that any further investigation of allegations of thefts from the evidence room would be a waste of time. Councilman Bob Grabowski said “I just think it’s a waste of resources based on an unsubstantiated letter." On the other hand, when

Councilman Paul Price asked Assistant County Administrator Paul Whitten, head of county public safety, how many people have access to the evidence room and how often an audit is performed.

Whitten said he didn’t know the answers to those questions.

Someone stealing from the evidence room is just unheard of. In Horry County, anyway. Wait, didn't Deirdre Faulk, a former evidence custodian, get convicted of breach of trust > $5000 for stealing from the evidence room? Oh.

Other allegations that Weaver determined were unfounded included an allegation that Lt. Michael Cannon was driving drunk - it was determined at the time that there was no evidence of Cannon driving drunk - he was found asleep in his car by another officer in a bank parking lot, and he told the officer that he was sleep deprived and therefore he felt it was not safe for him to drive home.

Weaver also determined that an allegation of criminal domestic violence against Deputy Chief David Beaty was unfounded, because "a review by the public information office found no domestic violence calls placed from the Beaty residence, nor was an EMS response ever made." If I remember right, the initial letter described "reports of domestic violence calls at an officer’s home being purged from the county’s records system," so stating that no reports of domestic violence calls can be found in the county's records system hardly lays the matter to rest.

Cindy Jolliff, mother of former police officer David Jolliff, who has been accused of being at the center of the anonymous letter controversy,

told council members her family has heard concerns from outside sources that the officers accused in the letter were planning retaliation, which included planting drugs in their cars and trying to put pornography on her son’s previous work computer.

“And some have even heard one of these men wishing bodily harm on my son,” Cindy Jolliff said. “Please tell me you all, as parents and grandparents, that you could not be concerned.”

An investigation into the County Police Department by the County Administrator, whom County Council is currently deciding whether they will allow to keep his job or not, is not an investigation. If there is nothing to hide, let an outside agency investigate whether the misconduct occurred or not.

The Myrtle Beach Fall bike rally kicks off today, and is expected to be bigger and better than the past few years.

Myrtle Beach's unconstitutional ordinances that targeted motorcyclists have been overturned, and there is no helmet law for riders over 21 years of age. Some information on events is available at myrtlebeachbikeweek.com.

More on the city ordinances here, here, and here.

Local lawmakers have asked SLED to investigate allegations of misconduct at the Horry County Police Department - allegations that were made in an anonymous letter sent to area leaders, purporting to be from an officer in the department.

The unsigned letter states that the author and other officers had hoped an outside agency would investigate the department after a controversy erupted earlier this year over the nomination of a former county police officer for a magistrate’s position in Georgetown County.

The former officer withdrew his name from consideration after embarrassing records about his past were released. The letter writer said the former officer was treated unfairly by people inside the police department.

The letter also describes reports of domestic violence calls at an officer’s home being purged from the county’s records system; drugs and money disappearing from the evidence room; and instances of officers traveling to motorcycle rallies in county vehicles.

The problem with this story is that the allegations are based on an anonymous letter. If there is misconduct, if there is destruction of evidence and cover-ups occurring that warrant investigation, someone should have the balls to come forward and make things right, and make themselves known in the process. Anonymous letters, like anonymous comments on blogs, have no credibility because it is difficult to check the facts, there is no person available to provide testimony or to answer follow up questions, and there is no way to ascertain the motivations of the anonymous whistle blower.

With no source listed, we are left to assume that the source is, or is connected to, the former Horry County Police Department employee who did not get the magistrate job that he wanted, referenced in the Horry County Police email snafu.

The article, however, also references other anonymous complaints (at least, there are no names listed as the sources):

State Sen. Ray Cleary, R-Murrells Inlet, told the Herald that there have been more complaints than a single anonymous letter. He said he’s heard concerns about the department from magistrates, police officers and Horry County Council members.

SLED has not yet said whether they are opening an investigation.

Well, it has been here for several weeks, as different schools take Spring Break at different times, sending their students to party in Myrtle Beach. The Season is in full swing. Except the local police departments, Myrtle Beach and North Myrtle, don't like college students drinking in their jurisdictions (or could care less but are raking in ticket money for the municipalities), and we see case after case of students arrested and jailed for either having beer or being in proximity to beer, charged with minor in possession or various other misdemeanors.

Sometimes they are valid arrests - such as when the students give consent to search and admit to possessing alcohol, for example. And there are those who walk down the street with a beer in their hand, oblivious to the fact that it is illegal and the police really do take people to jail for it.

But there are also many cases involving police walking into someone's hotel room without consent and without a warrant, and arresting everyone inside if there is any beer in sight. Without regard to the Fourth Amendment, often based on a noise complaint from neighbors or from management. And without regard to what they will actually have to prove if the case were to go to trial - simply being in a room with beer on the table or even in the fridge does not equal possession. Constructive possession, just as in a drug possession case, means that you will have to prove that the person knew that the beer was there, and that the person had the ability to control it's disposition (it has to be their beer).

I'm interested in knowing how many minor in possession of alcohol cases each municipality makes each summer, and how much money they generate. When the person arrested doesn't plead guilty and pay a fine at their bond hearing, the city courts now send out letters to all who are arrested, telling them about pre trial intervention (PTI) or the alcohol education program (AEP), which accomplishes 1) less jury trial requests; and 2) more income for the government.

I'm not knocking pre trial diversion programs, they are a wonderful thing for someone who has no prior record when the government can prove the case against them, but how many people whose rights were violated, or who are just not guilty, are going through pretrial diversion, doing community service, submitting to drug tests, or forced to attend counseling (depending on which program they are in), because it is easier or because they cannot afford to fight the charge?

15th Circuit Solicitor Greg Hembree talks about the recent departure of three assistant solicitors, and how it will not affect the remaining attorneys' caseloads, in a press release published in the Sun News today. "Three attorneys in the 15th Circuit Solicitor's office have left the prosecutor's office to go into private practice this year, Solicitor Greg Hembree said Friday."

Actually, four attorneys have left the prosecutor's office. There is no press release about the fourth, who I suspect was fired, following an episode where she was or was not (it was threatened but I don't know the outcome) held in contempt for her behavior during a hearing on a motion to compel Brady material. Four attorneys in the 15th Circuit Solicitor's Office have left to go into private practice.

"Hembree said the departures are expected because he understands the nature of attorneys getting experience as prosecutors and then going into private practice." That probably applies to Larry Filiberto, who left and has opened his own law practice in North Myrtle Beach, and to Mike O'Sullivan, who has gone to work defending insurance companies at an otherwise respectable law firm, but probably not to the third or fourth attorneys who left. The third attorney worked there since 1999, and I suspect was a career prosecutor until he was arrested for DUI. The fourth attorney was, I suspect, fired.

Hembree then says he will be filling only two of the open positions due to budget cutbacks. Which sounds a lot like he is saying they are losing one attorney position (he said that three attorneys have left the office). Except that four attorneys left, not three. Which means they are losing two attorney positions. I believe they are one short in the magistrate court division as well. Which would make them at least three attorneys shy of what they have had in past years, after they hire two more attorneys.

I don't normally comment on press releases from the solicitor's office, but the misstatements and misleading statements in this one really jumped out at me. Particularly given that Greg Hembree announced this week that he is running for Senate.

In Horry County, the public defender's office refuses to appear at any preliminary hearings, and the magistrates refuse to allow the public defender clients to go forward without their attorneys - the two together amounts to a systemic denial of due process for a majority of criminal defendants in Horry County. The preliminary hearing is a critical stage of the process, where the defendant or his attorney is able to cross examine the arresting officer to determine what the probable cause is for his arrest, and discover at least some of the evidence against him. The right to a preliminary hearing is guaranteed to every defendant with general sessions level charges:

§ 22-5-320. Defendant's demand for preliminary investigation; appearance by attorney
Any magistrate who issues a warrant charging a crime beyond his jurisdiction shall grant and hold a preliminary hearing of it upon the demand in writing of the defendant made within twenty days of the hearing to set bond for such charge; provided, however, that if such twenty-day period expires on a date prior to the convening of the next term of General Sessions Court having jurisdiction then the defendant may wait to make such request until a date at least ten days before the next term of General Sessions Court convenes. At the preliminary hearing, the defendant may cross-examine the state's witnesses in person or by counsel, have the reply in argument if there be counsel for the State, and be heard in argument in person or by counsel as to whether a probable case has been made out and as to whether the case ought to be dismissed by the magistrate and the defendant discharged without delay. . . .

Sitting in preliminary hearing court last week I saw a typical example - there was a decent sized crowd of people sitting in the audience, and a small group of inmates sitting in the jury box, with sheriff's deputies standing guard nearby. There are two jury boxes, one on each side of the courtroom - on the right side are the inmates and on the left side is a group of 10 - 12 officers, some sitting in the jury box and some standing. Two prosecutors stand at the table on the left, talking with officers and attorneys who are trying to get out of there sooner rather than later. There are no public defenders in the room. There are three private defense lawyers apart from myself, and two of those quickly waive their clients' prelims and leave.

The magistrate assigned to handle prelims today comes out and takes a seat on the bench, makes some opening remarks explaining what a preliminary hearing is, and then launches into a review of the docket for the morning. As one of the prosecutors begins to call out the first names on their list, the judge asks her to stop, notes that this will save some time, and asks for anyone who is represented by the public defender to stand up.

One at a time, the judge identifies those who have applied for a public defender - it quickly becomes clear that none of these individuals have spoken to their attorney, although they have filed their application for a public defender it is still early in their case and many do not even know their attorney's name. As each person identifies his or herself, the judge explains that the public defender does not do preliminary hearings and therefore that person's hearing is waived. One at a time, they walk out of the courtroom, confused and angry. Towards the beginning, two of them try to argue with the judge, explaining that they are prepared to go forward without their lawyer, but the judge refuses, explaining that if their attorney says their hearing is waived then it is waived. Have a nice day.

I understand the Court's reluctance to let defendants proceed pro se - when a defendant tries to handle their own preliminary hearing it is usually something like a train wreck. The officer testifies, then the defendant tries to tell the judge what really happened, rather than asking questions of the officer. The Court has to repeatedly cut off the defendant and explain that they are not there to testify and they can only ask questions. The defendant doesn't know what questions to ask or how to ask them, they only want to explain their side of things and they do not understand the process.

But I do not understand the refusal of the public defender's office to even appear on behalf of their clients - regardless of the public defender's personal view of the efficacy of preliminary hearings, it is a critical stage of the proceedings, it is a right guaranteed to every defendant by statute, and the denial of preliminary hearings to every indigent person in the county is a systemic denial of due process. In my opinion, each public defender who does not appear on behalf of their client, whether the boss has ordered it or not, is committing malpractice.

There is no downside to preliminary hearings - no harm comes to the defendant, they cannot go to jail if they lose, their charges cannot be increased if they lose. Many lawyers will say they are a waste of time - they will tell you that magistrates never dismiss a case at the prelim, and even if they do dismiss the case the solicitor's office can still have the case indicted by the grand jury. But the truth is, cases do get dismissed at prelims. Some cases are terrible, some arrests should have never been made, some magistrates can recognize this and they will dismiss when there is no probable cause. When the case is dismissed, sometimes the assistant solicitor on the case takes the time to look at why it was dismissed and they leave it that way.

When the case is not dismissed, or if it is dismissed and the solicitor indicts it and revives the charges, the benefit is still obvious. We now have a transcript of the officer's testimony, early in the case, as to what the evidence will show. The officer is now locked into that testimony and the transcript can provide invaluable impeachment material for trial if the officer tries to change the story when trial begins. It also gives us a picture of who the officer is, how they will testify, will they lie on the stand, are they evasive, or are they straight up and honest. All of which is invaluable if this case goes to trial.

Which tells me there are two reasons why attorneys waive preliminary hearings - 1) they are lazy; and/or 2) they have no intention of taking their client's case to trial. Who cares what the officer's testimony is going to be if I know I am never going to try the case.

Or, in the case of the public defender's office, perhaps the reason is because they are too busy. Is it because case loads are too high, we don't have sufficient funding to hire enough public defenders to handle the case load, and so we must perform triage, trimming the less essential parts of representation? I understand that, I was a public defender once, and I empathize. But nevertheless - shame on you for abdicating your responsibility for your clients. If the problem is case load and time constraints, stop taking new cases. Period. Don't screw the clients that you have and blame it on the legislature or anyone else. Refusing to appear at preliminary hearings, or neglecting any other part of client representation, is not going to get the legislature's attention and inspire them to fund your office. They are cheering you, applauding the fact that more defendants will be found guilty. Some of them would cut your funding completely if they could.

Props to Scott Joye who got a not guilty verdict for his client on charges of Murder in Marion, S.C., yesterday. Details are here.

According to WMBF, a drug bust today in Myrtle Beach netted 8 kilos of black tar heroin, 1 and a half kilos of powder heroin, and a quarter of a kilo of cocaine. The DEA and Horry County narcotics officers managed to make the bust, which was the culmination of a year-long investigation, when no-one was home, and no arrests were made.

An Horry County magistrate in Aynor has been suspended from office pending investigation of a complaint that was received by the SC Office of Disciplinary Counsel. I don't know why he was suspended or what the complaint was, or any other details about the situation.

A Myrtle Beach police officer was charged with CDV/ criminal domestic violence last week. It may come as a surprise to some, who believe in the infallibility of those who work for law enforcement agencies, that police officers are human beings - the thing that separates them from other citizens is a uniform, a badge, and the authority that we have vested in them. The article linked to illustrates this, as it tells a story of allegations similar to many domestic violence cases - if the allegations are true, the couple were drinking, they argued, it got physical, he held her down and tried to stop her from calling the police.

When the police arrived, the off-duty officer told the responding officers that she hit herself in the face. She told them that she did not want him to be arrested or prosecuted. They arrested him anyway.

The woman told police [the officer] held her arms down, refused to let her call 911 and punched her twice in the face, according to the report. The woman also complained of pain in her right ear and said [the officer] had hit her several times there.

The woman told police she scratched [the officer] in the face to get him off of her and this was the first physical altercation she has had with him, according to the report. The officer who responded to the incident wrote in his report that the woman had numerous wounds, but she refused medical treatment.

[the officer] told the officers that the woman struck herself in the face and he tried not to argue with the woman, according to the report. The woman told police she did not want [the officer] to be arrested.

To their credit, the responding officers made the arrest anyway - I have a problem with many arrests that are made when there is no physical evidence of CDV and the peace has been restored, but when there are physical injuries I do think the suspect should be arrested. Whether he or she is convicted later is another question.

A trooper was arrested Friday night in Horry County and charged with drug possession (looks like possession of cocaine), and has been fired from the Highway Patrol.

Lance Cpl. Bobby Lee Spurgeon was arrested Friday night, Capt. Scott Rutherford, Horry County Police Department, said.

Spurgeon is charged with possession of cocaine or other narcotics, according to the J. Reuben Long Detention Center’s booking Web site.

According to J. Reuben Long's website, Spurgeon was released Saturday on $10,000.00 bond. No doubt there will be more to this story - according to tv13:

Authorities said a joint investigation between the Horry County Police Department and South Carolina Highway Patrol is ongoing and that no further information could be released for fear of “compromising the ongoing investigation.”

The information that we can glean from a news report is always sparse, and there is always more to the story. I am only passing on the fact of the arrest, and I have no other information about Spurgeon's case at this time.

Dillon's mayor pro-tem was arrested and charged with criminal domestic violence of a high and aggravated nature last week.

This is a shocker, and I am impressed - the City of Myrtle Beach is issuing refunds for all of the fines that were paid by motorcyclists ticketed under the helmet ordinance, with interest:

Myrtle Beach has sent refunds to those who paid fines when they received tickets for not wearing motorcycle helmets, and a second set of checks went out this week for interest on the fines.

The city paid $13,964 in fine refunds for 141 tickets issued while the helmet law was in effect from February 2009 to this summer, when the state Supreme Court declared the law invalid.

City spokesman Mark Kruea said the city also sent an additional $869 in interest, figured at 7.25 percent and depending on how long ago the city collected the fines.

"The interest checks were between 50 cents and $10.50," he said.

Including mailing the checks, the city spent nearly $16,000 issuing the refunds and interest payments.

I wonder if it was in anticipation of a lawsuit to recover the fine money, but I prefer to think that it was a gesture of good faith in an attempt to restore public relations following a fiasco that the city has taken a lot of heat for. I didn't anticipate refunds would be sent out, but I think it was a great idea, from a public relations standpoint. Although the city still maintains that it will try to keep the rallies out of the city, I hope that some of the goodwill among motorcyclists can be restored and repaired.

Until this week, when the S.C. Supreme Court held that the City of Myrtle Beach's anti-motorcycle ordinances were unenforceable, there were signs at the city limits that read "Helmet Required" - I noticed today the signs are still up, but they've been replaced:

Earlier this week, the South Carolina Supreme Court released its decision on Myrtle Beach's motorcycle ordinances - the laws are invalid because they are pre-empted by state law.

n S.C. Code Ann. § 56-5-30 (2009) the General Assembly authorized local authorities to act in the field of traffic regulation if the ordinance does not conflict with the provisions of the Uniform Traffic Act. Even assuming, as the City contends, that the Helmet Ordinance does not conflict with the Uniform Traffic Act, we find that the ordinance may not stand as the need for uniformity is plainly evident in the regulation of motorcycle helmets and eyewear. Were local authorities allowed to enforce individual helmet ordinances, riders would need to familiarize themselves with the various ordinances in advance of a trip, so as to ensure compliance. Riders opting not to wear helmets or eyewear in other areas of the state would be obliged to carry the equipment with them if they intended to pass through a city with a helmet ordinance. Moreover, local authorities might enact ordinances imposing additional and even conflicting equipment requirements. Such burdens would unduly limit a citizen's freedom of movement throughout the State. Consequently, the Helmet Ordinance must fail under the doctrine of implied preemption.

Myrtle Beach City Council's attempt to harass bikers and kick them out of town = fail. How about we refund the money for all of the tickets that have been paid, now? And reimburse motorcyclists for the time that they spent on the side of the road getting hassled by the police during bike week? Because you knew, from the beginning, that these ordinances were unconstitutional?

Myrtle Beach Bike Rally is really a misnomer at this point - most bikers are avoiding Myrtle Beach itself, but the rally is going on and will be all week with events happening at venues around Myrtle Beach. Bikers who want to avoid the ridiculous and unconstitutional anti-motorcycle ordinances enacted by Myrtle Beach (helmet laws, noise ordinances, and parking laws for example) (and who want to avoid spending their money in the City of Myrtle Beach) can use Highway 31 to get around the city limits from Murrells Inlet or Garden City to North Myrtle Beach.

Hotspots outside the city limits of Myrtle Beach include Suck Bang Blow in Murrells Inlet; Myrtle Beach Harley Davidson (just barely outside of city limits on the south end of Business 17); Dead Dog Saloon in Murrells Inlet; the Rat Hole in Socastee just outside of MB city limits; the Beaver Bar in Murrells Inlet; and the Broken Spoke Saloon in Garden City.

The best map to show city limits is probably on Google Earth, which you have to download to use, but here is one from the City of Myrtle Beach's website - it is usable, but you have to play with the size a bit to make it viewable.

Call it whatever you want - Myrtle Beach Bike Week, Grand Strand Spring Rally, Grand Strand Rally, Cruisin' The Coast, Spring Rally, Murrells Inlet Spring Rally - just come. Don't let the City of Myrtle Beach kill a decades old tradition in the Grand Strand.

No criminal defense related stories at the moment, just enjoying life in Myrtle Beach.

It's beautiful today. This past week things have been jumping at the beach - it's warmed up, people are coming down to the water, there are events going on and people are driving, walking, riding motorcycles, bicycling, enjoying themselves and relaxing all around. There has been a car show going on down the road for the past three days and traffic is jammed up for blocks.

Today I'm working on a case that may go to trial week after next, but took a break to go down to the ocean, eat lunch, and play in the sand with my three-year old son. Tomorrow I may take him to Alligator Adventure, he will love it.

Back to work for now.

The Town of Atlantic Beach is looking for a new judge again - no doubt people are lined up to apply. They had to go to North Carolina to find the last one - some residents were complaining because they wanted an Atlantic Beach resident to fill the position. With a population of 397, that may be difficult.

We're looking for someone to fill a receptionist position at our office, at the front desk and answering phones:

Our office is looking for a receptionist/ administrative assistant. It is a full time position, 45-50 hours a week. Experience working in a law office is a bonus but is not a requirement. Pay is commensurate with experience, but this could be an entry-level position.

Our office handles criminal defense and personal injury cases. It is often a fast paced work environment and can be stressful at times. We are compassionate people, but it can be a demanding job. You will be expected to work weekends at times.

We represent people from all walks of life, and every client is important. We are looking for someone who has not led a sheltered life, who is shocked by nothing. We are looking for someone who is compassionate and who cares about people. If you consider yourself pro-law enforcement, a “law and order” type, or if you are not a people-person, this is not the right job for you.

If you think that this may be the right job for you, please respond by email only, to laurahiller@grandstrandlaw.com. Do not call or mail anything to us. Attach a resume to your email, in Word format, including your education, employment history, and references.

Also, attach a letter in Word format, no more than three pages long, telling us why you want to work for us. Tell us who you are and what you have done in your life, be open and honest, and we will keep your letter strictly confidential. Regardless of your legal experience as reflected on your resume, we want to know who you are. Be genuine and do not tailor your statement to what you think we want to hear. You may be surprised.

Pickens, S.C., lawyer Redmond Coyle was shot and killed outside of his office this afternoon. The man who is accused of shooting him, Jerry Dean Crenshaw, then turned his gun on himself:

Pickens Police Chief Tommy Ellenburg said a man shot Coyle multiple times before shooting himself. The incident took place in the parking lot behind Coyle’s 303 E. Main St. office, he said.

Jerry Dean Crenshaw was taken to Greenville Memorial Hospital for treatment, according to Ellenburg.

There is no information yet as to why it happened or what Crenshaw's condition is.

The results of the General Assembly's judicial elections are in - notably, Craig Brown of Florence, S.C. is now a circuit court judge. I don't know much about the other new judges, but Craig has considerable experience in civil and criminal law, and has worked as a defense lawyer in both state and federal court.

Court of Appeals:

Seat 5, Chief Judge Hon. John C. Few, Greenville

Circuit Court:

8th Judicial Circuit, Seat 1 Hon. Frank R. Addy, Jr., Greenwood

At Large, Seat 8 David C. Brown, Florence

Family Court:

2nd Judicial Circuit, Seat 1 Vicki J. Snelgrove, Aiken
5th Judicial Circuit, Seat 4 Gwendlyne Y. Smalls, Columbia
7th Judicial Circuit, Seat 1 Phillip K. Sinclair, Spartanburg
7th Judicial Circuit, Seat 3 Hon. Usha J. Bridges, Gaffney
13th Judicial Circuit, Seat 2 William M. Robertson, Greenville
16th Judicial Circuit, Seat 2 Hon. David G. Guyton, Rock Hill

A woman apparently died at the Conway Wal-mart on Friday, after employees fought with her because they suspected she was shoplifting:

One of the suspects collapsed at the scene and was taken to a hospital, where she was pronounced dead. Horry County Deputy Coroner Tony Hendrick says 41-year-old Dorina Williams of Nichols appears to have died from natural causes, but the official cause of death is still pending.

According to the Sun News, the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division has begun an investigation into whether the North Myrtle Beach public safety director was part of a "cover up" of a criminal domestic violence incident. He is already on administrative leave for lying about a stolen handgun.

The South Carolina Supreme Court will hear oral argument on the constitutionality of Myrtle Beach's helmet laws next month. The law is one of many passed by Myrtle Beach in an attempt to force out the May biker rallies. Among other reasons to strike down the ordinance, it is in violation of the South Carolina Constitution because it criminalizes conduct that is not criminal under state law. In my opinion it is an abuse of power by city officials, and I hope that the Court does the right thing.

Miles Ferguson was acquitted of homicide by child abuse this week following a trial that took nearly two weeks.

Stephen Stanko was sentenced to death this week after his second trial and conviction. After he was convicted and sentenced to death in Georgetown county, the 15th Circuit Solicitor's office prosecuted him again for an Horry County murder, because one death sentence was not enough. Now they get to kill him twice.

I've been away from the keyboard for a while and, although there are topics piling up that I want to blog about and share with you, other demands on my time have been taking priority. Balancing life, family, clients, and a blog is a constant struggle, but clients win every time.

In the meantime, I suggest that you take a look at a new criminal defense blog from Conway lawyer Johnny Gardner - Law and Baseball. We've been waiting a long time for another blog in South Carolina that has something to say about criminal law, and I am glad to see that Johnny has made an appearance on the internet.

Of course, the cost is to the taxpayers, not the city government - since the city raised taxes to cover the costs of killing the rallies. So far, according to the Sun News, the cost has risen to $145,000 in legal fees defending the lawsuits brought against the city. I haven't seen any estimate of the income that city's ordinances cost the business owners this year, but I am sure it is substantial.

The city's ordinances, which include a helmet law, were passed in an effort to keep bikers out of Myrtle Beach. Like the inane crackdowns on drinking in Myrtle Beach which have resulted in busloads of high school and college students spending their vacations in a jail cell, the ordinances are designed to mold the beach's image into something more suitable for some. A family vacation spot, possibly suitable for golfers but no parties allowed.

The ordinances are unconstitutional under the South Carolina Constitution for at least two reasons: 1) No municipality can criminalize conduct that is not criminal under state law, which is exactly what Myrtle Beach has done with their helmet law; and 2) the city attempted to create a special court to handle the charges as "infraction" rather than "crimes," but that effort has already been shot down by the Chief Justice, who pointed out that there is no provision in the Constitution for municipalities to create an additional tier of administrative courts.

I'm disappointed at the effort with which some of the cases have been prosecuted - the attorneys for Mike Shank and Harley Davidson of Myrtle Beach have already withdrawn their federal suit, once their request for an injunction was denied in the district court. Don Emery, The Master's Club and Sonny Copeland also filed a suit in federal court but have missed filing deadlines and let the lawsuit founder. "Emery, who is a candidate for Myrtle Beach City Council, said the suit is not a priority right now."

Attorneys Thad Viers and Tim McGrath are now awaiting a decision from the South Carolina Supreme Court as to whether they will hear oral arguments on their challenges to the ordinances.

Conway Attorney Irby Walker was charged today with trying to hire someone to kill another attorney, according to police.

Walker, 58, was charged with solicitation of a felony after Doug Thornton told police Sept. 11 that Walker had made threats against his life and believed he was trying to follow through on those threats, according to Horry County police Lt. Jamie DeBari.

I don't have much to say about this, but I felt that I needed to post it. The Horry County Bar is medium-sized at best, and most lawyers here know each other, at least in passing. It is difficult to believe that something like this is true, and the public reading the articles on the web or seeing this on the news needs to bear in mind that this attorney, like every other person accused of a crime, is presumed innocent at this point.

Atlantic Beach Mayor Retha Pierce was charged with driving under the influence on Wednesday, the latest in a series of misunderstandings with the law.

In April, Atlantic Beach Police Chief Randy Rizzo says Pierce was arrested on hit and run and failure to provide proof of insurance charges after side swiping a car and driving away.

Prior to the incident, Pierce was arrested in December 2007 on charges of reckless driving and failure to use a proper turn signal, and again in January after an argument with town officials.

Pierce, according to Rizzo, was expected to appear in court in Horry County Wednesday on disorderly conduct and tresspassing charges, stemming from her January arrest.

I'm sure that the Mayor has defenses to this and the other charges, and there is ongoing tension between her and other officials in Atlantic Beach that may explain some of her difficulties - she is innocent until proven guilty and she might be ok if she'd just stop picking up new charges. But . . . Atlantic Beach is a source of never ending amusement and embarrassment for Horry County. Keep 'em comin.

The Myrtle Beach Chamber of Commerce, apparently with nothing but time and money on their hands, has filed a defamation suit against the anonymous "Elmer Fudd" for posting comments on a Sun News message board which incorrectly stated that the chamber had been raided by the Horry County Police Department.

"It's something the chamber felt like they had to react to," [attorney Cherie Blackburn] said. "They couldn't allow the rumors to go unchallenged."

Blackburn said her office plans to file a subpoena this week to learn the identity of "Elmer Fudd." The lawsuit seeks unspecified monetary damages.

Did anyone believe such statements from the anonymous "Elmer Fudd," and was the chamber's reputation harmed? Is Mr. Fudd likely to have any assets that the chamber could recover from anyway? Patrick at Popehat sums it up: "Who in his wight mind would bewieve an accusation fwom Elmer Fudd? And why didn’t Ms. Bwackbuwn advise her cwient to wet it go?" (Be Vewy Vewy Quiet. I’m Fiwing Wawsuits.)

The S.C. Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments on the (un)constitutionality of Myrtle Beach's helmet law, one of a handful of new ordinances passed with the goal of shutting down the May bike rallies on the grand strand. The Court will consolidate the complaint filed by Business Owners Organized to Support Tourism (BOOST) and the cases of nearly 50 motorcycle riders who were ticketed during a protest ride earlier this year.

There is no date set as of yet for arguments, but it could be as early as this fall.

Myrtle Beach police intend to harass motorcyclists at the following locations/dates/times:

May, 12, from 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. on Ocean Blvd. (between 8th and 9th N), May 14, 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. on Farrow Parkway at Warbird Park and 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. on US 501 and Hwy 17 Bypass (eastbound), May 15, 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. on US 501 and Hwy 17 Bypass (eastbound).

During the Memorial Weekend Bikefest, check points are scheduled May, 21, from 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. on Ocean Blvd (between 8th and 9th N), May, 22, from 10:00 to 12:00 p.m. on Farrow Parkway at Warbird Park, May 23 from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. on US 501 & 17 Bypass (eastbound) and May 24 from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.on US 501 & 17 Bypass (eastbound).

One of four lawsuits that have been filed against the City of Myrtle Beach is set to be heard by the South Carolina Supreme Court, provided that they accept the case. The South Carolina Constitution has a provision that the Court has held in several cases prohibits local municipalities from criminalizing conduct which is not already criminal under state law, to achieve uniformity in the criminal laws across the state. South Carolina does not require motorcyclists to wear a helmet if they are over the age of 21, which means that Myrtle Beach does not have the authority to criminalize riding without a helmet for those over the age of 21.

Another constitutional issue was the formation of a new administrative court to hear the violations, which would have created a new "tier" of courts not authorized by our State Constitution. Myrtle Beach has sidestepped this issue by scrapping the administrative court idea and sending the tickets to the municipal court instead.

BOOST attorney Thad Viers, who also represents the area in the state legislature, said in the release that he and the group are pleased the city agreed to go straight to the Supreme Court, because it will save taxpayer money. He also said he hopes it will lead to a swift resolution.

The business owners' group said it thinks the city has broken the law by requiring motorcycle riders to wear helmets when the state does not, at least for those 21 and older.

The city passed a series of ordinances and amendments last fall, including the helmet rule, that will affect those heading into town this month for the Harley-Davidson Spring Cruising the Coast Rally and the Atlantic Beach Bikefest. In years past, those rallies have drawn an estimated 500,000 people to the Grand Strand.

Hotel owners report that Hotel reservations in the city are down (note that many bikers who are coming to the rally have vowed not to spend a dime in the City of Myrtle Beach). Vendors are setting up at Suck Bang and Blow south of Myrtle Beach and at Barefoot Landing in North Myrtle Beach.

Myrtle Beach city council has failed in their attempt to run bikers out of town and cancel the May rallies. First they attempted to run off the black bikers at Atlantic Beach Bikefest - "In 2005, a federal judge ruled that Myrtle Beach had discriminated against black bikers by changing traffic patterns for their rally but not for the Harley-Davidson rally."

Then they tried a different, all-inclusive approach by passing numerous unconstitutional ordinances aimed at harassing motorcyclists and businesses who supported them. So far, four lawsuits have been filed against the city, none of which will be resolved by the end of May. The Carolina Harley Davidson Dealer's Association has folded up by itself and moved its events to New Bern, N.C., 170 miles away from the Grand Strand, but by all accounts all others are still heading to Myrtle Beach and the surrounding area.

Related posts:
Chief Justice warns that ordinances aimed at bikers are unconstitutional
Myrtle Beach's helmet law
Myrtle Beach begins enforcement of ordinances designed to force out bike rally
Myrtle Beach continues efforts to shut down the May bike rally
Three lawsuits filed to declare Myrtle Beach's bike rally ordinances unconstitutional
Matt Brown weighs in

Although I have not seen the memo, the Sun News is reporting that Chief Justice Toal sent out a memo to municipal courts today warning that the new system of "administrative courts" that are being set up to handle ordinances such as Myrtle Beach's anti-biker laws and other cities' smoking bans are in violation of the state constitution.

Chief Justice Jean Hoefer Toal on March 23 issued a one-paragraph memo to county and city administrators, attorneys and council chairs that says she received information that some counties and municipalities "are attempting to create by local ordinance another tier of courts, typically designated as 'administrative hearing courts'" to deal with smoking bans and other local ordinance violations. . . .

Toal calls the administrative hearing system "repugnant" to the state's uniform judicial system, and says setting up administrative hearing courts violates articles V and VIII of the state constitution.

Several lawsuits have been filed already over the Myrtle Beach ordinances and one of them challenges the constitutionality of the administrative hearing process as well. Besides the constitutional problems, the idea of passing a set of ordinances for the sole purpose of running a running a group of people out of town is disgusting and should not be something that Americans anywhere should stand for in this day and age. As I said before, Bikers Welcome - Come to Myrtle Beach, be loud, and don't wear your helmet. If they write you a ticket, pay it or fight it but don't let them run an entire group of people out of town.

Related posts:
Myrtle Beach's helmet law
Myrtle Beach begins enforcement of ordinances designed to force out bike rally
Myrtle Beach continues efforts to shut down the May bike rally
Three lawsuits filed to declare Myrtle Beach's bike rally ordinances unconstitutional
Matt Brown weighs in

According to the Sun News, Myrtle Beach police issued 63 tickets during the Helmet Freedom Ride over the weekend, which protested the city's new helmet laws. On my last post about Myrtle Beach's new ordinances, an anonymous commenter questioned the ethics of the following statement:

Come to Myrtle Beach, be loud, and don't wear your helmet. If they write you a ticket, pay it or fight it but don't let them run an entire group of people out of town.

The anonymous commenter did not think that it would be ethical to tell people to break a law, and felt that my only purpose in doing so is to obtain clients who were written tickets for not wearing helmets. The comment was more insulting than it was constructive, which is why it was deleted, but I do think that the issue raised is worth addressing:

First, I think that civil disobedience, with full knowledge of the consequences, is quite ethical. More so than blind obedience to a law whose constitutionality is questionable at best - the law needs to be challenged, and I stand by my statement. However, I welcome any constructive counterarguments to this.

Second, I have not been retained on any helmet violations and I do not intend to be. I am certainly not advertising to defend 100$ tickets for helmet violations. This ordinance is set up as what they are calling an "administrative infraction," in an attempt to avoid constitutional challenges to the law. The idea is, we will call it an "infraction" as opposed to a criminal offense, and the constitution will not apply. There is no potential for jail time and the fine is a flat $100 (note that you could be held in contempt and jailed if you lose your case and you do not pay your fine). I believe they are taking the position that you are not entitled to a jury trial as well.

This means that this is not an area of the law where lawyers are going to be in high demand - the cost of an attorney's time to defend the ticket is not going to be economically feasible for a $100 ticket, unless either the attorney takes the case without pay on principle, or unless the client pays for the attorney's time on principle. Either way, it will only take one such case to make a record at the city court and then appeal the conviction to obtain a ruling in the South Carolina Supreme Court. So, please do not call me to defend your helmet ticket - but, feel free to get one in protest and fight it.

Comments are welcome.

Myrtle Beach police have begun to write tickets to bikers without helmets over the weekend, and last week signs appeared on some roads at city limits proclaiming that all motorcyclists must wear a helmet. The City of Myrtle Beach began it's campaign last year to end the May motorcycle rallies, including the Harley-Davidson Spring Rally in Myrtle Beach and the Atlantic Beach Bikefest which is centered on Atlantic Beach. Ultimately, the City raised property taxes by $1 million to fund the potential loss of revenue and passed 15 ordinances last fall, designed to harass motorcyclists, and businesses that support them, to the point where they will not return.

At least three lawsuits have been filed asking for declaratory judgments that Myrtle Beach's new ordinances aimed at bikers are unconstitutional, and asking for injunctions against their enforcement. Last week, Circuit Court Judge Michael Baxley denied a request for an injunction against enforcement of the ordinances and to halt the administrative hearing process that the City has set up, holding that the ordinances do not violate state law.

Over the weekend, the Myrtle Beach Freedom Helmet Ride went forward as planned and about 200 riders and passengers took part in the protest. Myrtle Beach police officers waited for the first motorcyclists to arrive then began stopping them and writing tickets:

Four police cars parked along the southern end of Ocean Boulevard, and as soon as the first group of motorcycles with the Myrtle Beach Helmet Freedom Ride passed them, officers turned on their lights, sounded their sirens and stopped the group, causing a makeshift roadblock just before the Springmaid Pier.
Myrtle Beach police officers handed out their first helmet tickets to motorcycle riders who violated the city's new law Saturday.
Capt. David Knipes, public information officer for the Myrtle Beach Police Department, said he would not have a total amount of helmet-violation citations or details of any related arrests until Monday.

According to the Sun News, Atlantic Beach is having second thoughts about continuing to support the Atlantic Beach Bikefest as well, in response to an offer of financial assistance from Myrtle Beach City Manager Tom Leath:

Myrtle Beach City Manager Tom Leath described the new effort as a way to move Atlantic Beach away from a one-week-a-year "rally economy" and into competition with the rest of the Grand Strand for an entire season's worth of tourism money. Among the largely undeveloped town's obstacles to growth are a number of assorted debts and legal judgments, as well as aging infrastructure and a general shortage of resources.
"It's not like we'd pay Atlantic Beach to take the rallies away," Leath said. "But one impacts the other. They need to pass their zoning rewrites, and that takes money for staff or consultants. They need to work on their comprehensive plan. They need infrastructure upgrades to water, sewer and electric and the street grids. Those take money to plan."
Both Rhodes and Leath said they hope other governments also join in the effort, one that could redefine that corner of the Grand Strand. The county already extends its assistance to Atlantic Beach, covering emergency police calls when the town's four-member force is off duty, and Gilland said the county would be "more than willing" to continue assisting.
"If Atlantic Beach is going to truly redevelop, Bikefest needs to go away," Leath said. "The 3-mill increase we passed could go toward that.

In the comments to prior posts on this blog, and on other sites, a lot of motorcyclists have said they just won't come - Myrtle Beach will lose their business and "that will show them." What these people are missing is that they are doing exactly what the City wants them to - Myrtle Beach is not going to lose revenue, they are going to make up for any lost revenue in property taxes extracted from residents and from revenues from the tickets they will write. Come to Myrtle Beach, be loud, and don't wear your helmet. If they write you a ticket, pay it or fight it but don't let them run an entire group of people out of town.

Deborah Leask is fighting for the right to keep her pet pig, Wiggly, in her backyard. The county's zoning board has ruled that she must get rid of Wiggly, and, looking at Horry County's public index, it appears that she has been convicted in the magistrate court of public nuisance and permitting domestic animals to run at large in 2007, and has a zoning violation pending still in the Conway magistrate court.

A battle over swine is going to local court on Tuesday as an Horry County woman protests a county decision that she cannot keep a pet pig at her suburban home.

It will be the most recent step in Deborah Leask's months-long fight to keep the pig, Wiggly, in the backyard of her home in the Plantation Point subdivision west of Myrtle Beach. She was issued a citation last year, and the county's zoning board of appeals has ruled against her.

Leask said Wiggly is a pot-bellied pig, which enthusiasts say make just as good pets as dogs or cats. The animals are intelligent, emotional and, contrary to popular belief, relatively clean, some say.

At issue for Leask is whether Wiggly should be considered a pet or livestock. County zoning rules do not allow livestock in residential areas, and Curt Freese, the county's zoning administrator, said he considers the pig to be livestock.

Leask said the pig should not be considered livestock because the animal is not being raised for food nor is Leask making any profit off the pig.

"Pot-bellied pigs are kept all over the country as domesticated pets," she said. "I would like to have the same opportunity to have domesticated pet pigs as other Americans have."

"They're very sweet animals, very loving animals," said Ben Watkins, the executive director of the Ironwood Pig Sanctuary, which hosts 580 pot-bellied pigs in Arizona. "They like to be petted. They like their belly rubbed."

If the pig is getting out and causing problems, it should be treated the same as any other pet that gets out of the fence. But, calling someone's pet pig "livestock" to try and force them to get rid of it is just ridiculous. People keep pigs for pets. It's no larger than many dogs, most likely quieter, and safer. Certainly we can find a more efficient use of court time than persecuting Wiggly the pet pig.

I've been told by several local prosecutors that they read my blog and disagree with a lot of things that I have to say. I'm glad that you are reading, and I want to hear from you - please comment on blog posts that you disagree with and tell me why. You don't have to say who you are, and you have the option of posting anonymously. Better yet, one of you should start a blog to give us the perspective from the other side of the fence.

I try to say things here that need to be said, but others do not say. I try to provoke thought about why things are done the way that they are and how we can improve our system. I welcome contrary ideas and opinions, and would love to see open debate on some of these topics.

I am honestly baffled by some of the things that I see some prosecutors doing, such as the use of jailhouse snitches to win cases, even when the evidence shows that they are lying. How do your brethren square this with their mandate of pursuing justice? Surely Justice is not achieved by securing convictions on the basis of perjured testimony.

South Carolina and Horry County need a prosecution blog. Anyone can do it, just go here and follow the instructions. It is free. It is easy. It is anonymous.

Joseph Gardner was executed at 6:00 P.M. yesterday in Columbia. He was the 40th inmate put to death in South Carolina since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, and the third inmate executed in the Palmetto State this year.

According to the Death Penalty Information Center, Gardner is the last inmate to be executed this year.

Through his attorney, Gardner offered a written final statement apologizing to McLauchlin's family for causing them such pain. He spent the day with his lawyer, Keir Weyble, but opted to forgo a last meal before he met his fate.

Gardner's statement

"I would like to apologize to the family and loved ones of Melissa McLauchlin for taking her from them and causing them so much pain. I was 22 years old then, and I am 38 now. While I have always been sorry for what I did, the passage of time has allowed me to mature, reflect and experience spiritual growth in ways that were foreign to me as a young man. I have repented for what I have done, and I am very grateful to the many people who have prayed with me and for me over the years and in my final days. I deeply regret that my actions deprived Ms. McLauchlin of the chance to marry, have children and experience life with God. I have spent years praying for her, and I encourage all people of faith to do the same."

North Myrtle Beach police have decided not to charge anyone in the Walmart death I posted about yesterday.

North Myrtle Beach police will not file any charges regarding the death of a man last week at a local Wal-Mart.

Patrick Donovan, 53, of Florida, died on Nov. 29 after three employees and a bystander wrestled him to the ground. They said Donovan was trying to shoplift $393 in merchandise.

"There will be no charges pressed," said Nicole Aiello, spokeswoman for the city of North Myrtle Beach. "There is no criminal act."

The report goes on to say that they still have not determined the cause of death. Horry County Deputy Coroner Tamara Willard says "As far as I am concerned there is no case here," and it is possible the man died from natural causes. If they have not determined the cause of death, and all that they know is that he was assaulted by a group of Walmart employees, isn't it a bit premature to proclaim, "there is no case here"?

A man died November 29th after being wrestled to the ground by Walmart employees in North Myrtle Beach:

The man died Nov. 29 after store employees stopped a possible shoplifter, according to a report from the North Myrtle Beach Department of Public Safety. The report said the man died at Grand Strand Regional Medical Center.

Horry County Deputy Coroner Tamara Willard said the cause of death remains under investigation.

No one is accusing Walmart's elite loss prevention folks of murder just yet, but

Officers found the man on his back on the sidewalk outside the store, the report said.

One customer told police she saw a struggle between three Wal-Mart employees and the man.

Now, let's assume for purposes of this conversation that the Walmart employees in some way caused this man's death. No one has been charged as far as I know and anything is possible; but for arguments sake here, I will assume that he did not drop dead of natural causes while loss prevention was chasing him. S.C. law permits a citizen's arrest:.

Upon (a) view of a felony committed, (b) certain information that a felony has been committed or (c) view of a larceny committed, any person may arrest the felon or thief and take him to a judge or magistrate, to be dealt with according to law. (S.C. Code 17-13-10)

And S.C. law permits the use of deadly force during a citizen's arrest as well:

A citizen may arrest a person in the nighttime by efficient means as the darkness and the probability of escape render necessary, even if the life of the person should be taken, when the person:

(a) has committed a felony;

(b) has entered a dwelling house without express or implied permission;

(c) has broken or is breaking into an outhouse with a view to plunder;

(d) has in his possession stolen property; or

(e) being under circumstances which raise just suspicion of his design to steal or to commit some felony, flees when he is hailed. (S.C. Code 17-13-20)

But could this justify causing the death of a person while stopping them from shoplifting? In Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985), the U.S. Supreme Court held that a police officer cannot use deadly force against an apparently unarmed, non-dangerous fleeing suspect. S.C. however, has held that Garner does not apply to private citizens:

The Fourth Amendment proscription against warrantless searches and seizures does not apply to searches by private individuals not acting as agents of the State. Peters v. State, 302 S.C. 59, 393 S.E.2d 387 (1990). We extend the reasoning in Peters to apply to seizures by private citizens. Cooney was acting free of State influence when he attempted to arrest Williams. Accordingly, we find the holding in Garner does not apply to seizures by private persons and does not change the State's criminal law with respect to citizens using force in apprehending a fleeing felon . . .

In order to invoke the defense of justifiable killing in apprehending a fleeing felon, appellant at a minimum must show that he had certain information that a felony had been committed, § 17-13-10(b), and he used reasonable means to effect the arrest. State v. Cooney, 320 S.C. 107 (1995)

So, shocking as the conduct of Walmart employees is when they are using force to apprehend shoplifters, is it possible that they could be justified in killing the guy who just stuck a candy bar in his pocket and ran out the door? And even if they are, what kind of sense does it make to have a policy of using physical force to apprehend shoplifters? I can't imagine the resulting litigation and potential for criminal charges against a worker costs less than the items that may be lost. But, I'm sure they've crunched the numbers.

David Wren at the Sun News published an article today debunking the claims of local business and law enforcement that the Horry County area's high crime rate is inaccurate because tourists who commit crimes are not taken into account:

Most of the people arrested for committing violent crimes in Horry County live along the Grand Strand, according to an analysis of this year's booking reports at J. Reuben Long Detention Center in Conway.

Those reports appear to undermine statements made last week by local business and law enforcement officials, who are critical of a new CQ Press study that ranks the Myrtle Beach metro area - which includes all of Horry County - as the 14th-most-dangerous place in the United States.

Local officials say the CQ Press report is skewed because it does not take into account about 14 million tourists who visit Horry County each year.

Wren says that a review of 14,000 booking reports shows that 83% of persons charged with violent crimes, including robbery, aggravated assaults, rape and murder, are locals. Out of 671 bookings for serious violent crimes, 551 had home addresses in Horry and Georgetown Counties. He also points out that the Myrtle Beach metro area has more than double the crime rate of the New York metro area, which has 44 million tourists a year. Also,

The Atlantic City, N.J., metro area has a permanent population roughly the same size as Horry County's and claims 37 million annual visitors. That metro area had 1,594 reported incidents of violent crime last year for a rate of 589.5 crimes per 100,000 residents.

The Myrtle Beach metro area's violent crime rate also is higher than tourism meccas Las Vegas and Orlando, Fla., both of which attract about three times as many annual visitors as Horry County.

Myrtle Beach's crime rate, according to the FBI, is 948.1 incidents per 100,000 residents. Of course local business leaders and law enforcement want to make it look better than it is - local business leaders are afraid that tourists will stay away if they hear about the stats and fear that they might get robbed or killed while here on vacation, and law enforcement is afraid that we will think they aren't doing a good enough job.

Whenever a report comes out that says the Myrtle Beach metro area has the xth highest crime rate in the nation, local government has fits. We don't want to scare off the tourists with the idea that they will get robbed or murdered while here on vacation. Last year it was announced that we had the 7th highest crime rate in the U.S. This time we are the 14th:

Local business and law enforcement officials disputed a report Tuesday that lists the Myrtle Beach metropolitan statistical area as being the 14th most dangerous place in the nation.

The report, released this week by CQ Press, uses annual crime statistics from the FBI to rank 356 metro areas nationwide. Among the crimes factored into the study are murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary and motor vehicle theft.

CQ Press takes the total number of crimes and divides them by an area's population. The report gives the Myrtle Beach metro area, which includes all of Horry County, a crime score of 70.16 - the 14th worst score nationwide.

Local officials, however, said the report does not factor in the region's 14 million annual tourists and parttime residents. This area's ranking improves to 149, which is near the national average, when those people are included.

The chamber of commerce, police chiefs, and our solicitor Greg Hembree all attended a news conference today to set the record straight. Sumter was ranked 5th, Florence was ranked 6th, and Charleston was ranked 21st most dangerous areas in the nation, according to the report.

In the past, no-one charged with a lower-court misdemeanor in South Carolina was entitled to representation, and if defendants could not afford to hire an attorney they were on their own, which typically meant either a guilty plea or guilty verdict regardless of the merits of their case. There was no prosecutor in the magistrate courts either, which meant that officers were required to prosecute their own cases.

In recent years, solicitor's offices have received funding to assign prosecutors to the magistrate courts specifically to prosecute DUI's and CDV's. Now there are trained prosecutors acting against pro-se defendants who have no training in the law. From what I understand, some counties have assigned public defenders to the magistrate courts to defend DUI and CDV cases, but not in Horry County as of yet. There is something inherently wrong with a system where we are providing trained attorneys to prosecute citizens who have no access to a defense.

There are local attorneys who pick up some of the slack by taking lower court cases at low fees. Often this consists of paying the attorney for a guilty plea, which the defendant could have done without an attorney. But there are many people who are charged who cannot afford even 500$ for a lawyer, and some of those have valid defenses and yet are not afforded counsel. In the city courtrooms, there have always been prosecutors and no opportunity for indigent defense.

If the state (or a city) is going to prosecute a person, they have an obligation to provide a defense to that person as well, when the person is indigent. More and more money is poured into law enforcement and solicitor's offices, more arrests are made for more crimes, and provision has to be made to ensure that the system is fair and balanced. This should apply to the magistrate and municipal courts as well as to the higher courts.

The Defending Drug Cases Seminar went well, and I have a few more tools to take home with me for the next trial. I had the pleasure of meeting with Houston criminal defense lawyers Mark Bennett and Paul Kennedy today for BBQ and good conversation. Bennett believes that we are three guys in desperate need of razors, although I have to note that he managed to not get into the picture. As you can see on his website, however, he is also in desperate need of a razor.

It really is amazing to get out of South Carolina and see how things are done in other parts of the country; in some respects it makes me feel better about the system we have in S.C., but it also highlights areas that we could improve upon.

Despite an ever present need for improvement and more funding, we are doing well with our public defender system compared to some other states. The public defender system seems to be fragmented in Texas; for example Dallas has a public defender office but in Harris County (Houston) there is no public defender. Indigent cases are handled by court appointed attorneys with no real system in place.

Texas, like many states, has attorney-conducted voir dire which seems to be considered a necessity by all parties involved including the judges. Picking a jury without the benefit of voir dire, as we have to do in South Carolina in all but capital murder trials, is flying blind. There can't be any meaningful jury selection based only on name, occupation, and the few questions that our judges will ask the jury for us.

At any rate, I am glad to be coming home and we're set to jump back into the fray, with a DUI trial scheduled for Monday morning (and trials on CDV and assault charges in different courts later in the week) and a retrial of last week's murder trial coming up soon.

The ABA Journal has a story on how it is getting harder and harder for recent law school grads to find jobs, and the jobs that they do find are not paying what they had hoped. "The nearly 44,000 law students set to graduate in 2009 will have at an average of $73,000 in loan debt and face a grim hiring market."

It's not just a result of a down economy, although certainly that contributes, but is likely also a product of more and more law schools turning out more and more lawyers. South Carolina has only two law schools, and until recently had one law school, but the job search for recent graduates is as dire here as it is anywhere. Nationwide, there is no doubt that we have a surplus of persons with law degrees who would like to be attorneys, and the bottom line is there are not enough attorney jobs to go around.

I considered why we do not regulate the number of attorneys entering the legal profession in the same way as physicians, keeping up the demand for lawyers (and thereby the compensation as well). Possibly, each state could regulate the number of persons admitted to practice as attorneys, but I do not think there should ever be a limit on the number of persons admitted to study law. I believe that, given the motive and opportunity, every person should have a legal education. It is invaluable not just for the practice of law, but in any business-oriented job and for life in general.

By the way, can you imagine a state and federal government where every employee is required to actually understand what government is and why we have it? Where legislators are required to learn what law is before they start drafting them? Or a president who is actually qualified to interpret and uphold the Constitution?

At any rate, I believe that less and less people who graduate from law school in this day and age are going to be practicing attorneys. Banks, stockbrokers, law enforcement, all kinds of other businesses need/ look for persons with a legal education and there are high paying jobs available, even if it is not the "dream job" that the person thought they would land with some big firm. (Not my idea of a dream job, by the way. From where I sit, corporate lawyers look pretty damn miserable, extra money or no).

I wish all the recent and upcoming graduates the best in their job searches. And, you're welcome to keep sending resumes for my file, but I am not hiring right now either.

So far, three lawsuits have been filed asking for declaratory judgments that Myrtle Beach's new ordinances aimed at bikers are unconstitutional, and asking for injunctions against their enforcement. The first was filed in state court on behalf of two local residents and motorcyclists, challenging the helmet and noise ordinances as exceeding the requirements of state helmet and noise laws.

Husband and wife William and Carol O'Day of Myrtle Beach claim in their lawsuit that mandating all motorcyclists to wear helmets and protective eyewear conflicts with state law, which requires only those under age 21 wear them. It also claims specifying that mufflers be no louder than 87 decibels while idling exceeds state law, which says, more generally, that mufflers must prevent excessive noise and annoying smoke.

The rules require the O'Days to ``purchase and use equipment not mandated by state law in order to enjoy the recreational use of their Kawasaki motorcycle within the city limits,'' reads the lawsuit, filed Monday.

The second suit was filed in federal court on behalf of local business owners:

Coe said she intends to file her lawsuit Monday morning in federal court in Florence and ask a judge to issue a temporary restraining order to prevent enforcement of the city's noise-ordinance amendment, the nui- sance-law amendment and the new ordinance that restricts people from using Myrtle Beach as the focus when advertising unpermitted events such as the bike rallies.

"It's a First Amendment issue," Coe said Friday. "People are afraid to speak, to advertise or hold events for fear they will be charged with crimes."

Myrtle Beach Harley Davidson has apparently filed a third suit in federal court as well. Not all residents are against the bike rallys, and many businesses recognize the huge economic impact that the rallys have on the Myrtle Beach area.

Don Emery, owner of The Dog House Bar & Grill, says he doesn't understand why the city wants to damage rallies that bring a lot of money into town. Emery and other Myrtle Beach business owners filed a lawsuit against the city calling three ordinances against noise and nuisance unconstitutional.

"It's perception that the city doesn't want bikers," says Emery. "That's just not true. The city council may not want the bikers, but the businesses do, the employers do, and we're happy to have them here."

I've heard some people say in protest of the new ordinances, "I just won't come to Myrtle Beach, I won't spend my money there." Please - if this is what you are thinking then you are giving city council exactly what they wanted. You lose. They win. If these ordinances piss you off, come to Myrtle Beach loud as you want and do not let them push an entire group of people out and destroy a Myrtle Beach tradition with these types of tactics. The city knew when it passed these ordinances that they were not constitutional and there were going to be problems.

Mike Wright, from Maryland, says he thinks the new laws should prompt every biker in the country to head to Myrtle Beach.

"Every biker. And bring their helmets, and obey their laws, and crush this place. Crush it. Just to make a point. You're not going to mess with our right to lawfully have a good time."

The Courts will have the final word, but these laws are full of issues that were foreseeable. Any local ordinance prohibiting conduct that is not prohibited under state law is unconstitutional. Commercial speech is protected speech under the First Amendment. And the city cannot deny that its intent was to target the May bike rallys, as this has been their stated purpose from the beginning and they have not tried to hide it.

For some time now, the city of Myrtle Beach has been working on plans to end the Memorial Day Harley Davidson rally and "black bike week" the week after the Harley rally. In June of this year, the city passed a 3-million dollar property tax increase, to fund anti-rally efforts. Last month at a city council meeting to discuss the anti-rally campaign, supporters of the bike rally were told by Myrtle Beach mayor John Rhodes, "If you don't like it, I'd leave."

Myrtle Beach does not sponsor any motorcycle events, and cannot simply order the rally not to come next May. So, the plan is to do everything possible to harass the motorcyclists and vendors in an attempt to force them out. The proposals so far include new laws declaring unpermitted rallies and events to be public nuisances, creating a midnight curfew, closing bars at 2 am, requiring all motorcyclists to wear helmets (not a requirement under state law), towing and impounding all motorcycles that do not meet noise standards, checkpoints where motorcycles will be monitored for noise, and traffic diversion such as barriers and closed streets.

The city will call offenses "infractions" rather than criminal offenses - an "administrative hearing system" could be implemented to deal with "civil punishments" for infractions. Business owners or persons who sponsor rally events that "require a heightened law enforcement response" could be held liable for the city's expenses. Business owners and property owners may be required to install video cameras or even hire guards to enforce new parking lot ordinances.

Myrtle Beach is my home, and this is an embarrassment to me. Our city is saying that we cannot tolerate diversity, if the rally does not leave we will pre-meditatedly violate the civil rights of motorcyclists and business owners, and we will not permit anyone to speak in dissent. I sincerely hope that the rally will come in May of 2009, and that these ridiculous measures that have been proposed will cost the city more than they bargained for in litigation.

Welcome bikers.

The 180 year old historic courthouse in Lancaster, S.C. was burned down earlier this week.

An arsonist accomplished Monday what William T. Sherman couldn't in his notorious "march to the sea" -- burning down the 180-year-old Lancaster County Courthouse.

We have some beautiful historic courthouses throughout South Carolina, and this was truly a loss for Lancaster and the state. The courthouse was built in 1828, and was designed by South Carolina architect Robert Mills, who also designed the Washington Monument. An earlier courthouse that stood on the same spot was reported to be the site of the last witchcraft trial held in the United States in 1813 (there's a claim to fame).

But that's not the end of the story - Thursday morning the job was finished when the Lancaster Solicitor's office was destroyed in a second fire. There are no suspects as of yet, but there was a murder trial set to begin next week at the courthouse.

Lancaster's police captain offers some brilliant advice to residents on how to spot suspects:

"experience shows the suspect will likely follow the investigation closely in media reports and in conversations. He may make comments or offer reasons why he believes the fires were started such as, 'What do they expect? They didn't have any alarm system'; 'It was probably just some kids'; 'The court here is corrupt, biased, etc.'; 'No one was hurt,'" Howard said.

If you see anyone watching this story on the news, or talking about it, please report them immediately.

All jokes aside, my condolences go out to the residents of Lancaster and to their solicitor. This was truly a tragedy for this town.

In March 2008, Richard Gagnon was found guilty in Horry County of the murder of his girlfriend's mother and father, and he was sentenced to life in prison. The trial was televised live on Court TV, and I was surprised to hear most people who were following the story say that they thought he was innocent. Not just not guilty, but innocent. People on the street, people who left comments on the media blogs, even courthouse personnel felt that there was insufficient evidence that he had committed the crime, and were convinced that he would be found not guilty.

The girlfriend had been arrested and charged with the murder, then released and the charges dropped before Gagnon was charged. The evidence against him was circumstantial at best, there was DNA evidence placing someone else at the crime scene, and the state's case was based primarily on the testimony of a jailhouse snitch, Robert Mullins, who claimed that Gagnon had confessed to him while they were in jail. The jury convicted Gagnon, undoubtedly based on this witness' testimony.

Anytime the state needs to shore up their case, they can go down to the jail and round up some people that are willing to testify. In any high profile case, people with a) charges pending against them and b) information about the case, come out of the woodwork. Now, the Sun News reports that a new witness has come forward with information, writing to Gagnon's defense attorneys that Mullins was lying at Gagnon's trial.

Sometimes, the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt is not good enough to ensure that innocent persons are not convicted. When a person is accused of murder, armed robbery, or any serious offense, it is difficult for jurors to hold the state to their burden of proof, and the defendant truly has to prove his or her innocence. In most cases, the prosecutor has quite a bit of credibility with the jury, and they want to believe that what the prosecutor is saying is true. The prosecutor would not tell them this person is guilty if it were not true, and surely the prosecutor would not put a witness on the stand that would not tell the truth?

When there is scant evidence of guilt other than a jailhouse snitch, and there is DNA evidence placing another person at the scene of the crime, do we blame the prosecutor for going forward with a case knowing that the jury may convict an innocent person? In South Carolina the Solicitor is an elected official, the media is watching, and the public demands a conviction. I can understand why prosecutors go forward with these types of cases, and rely on defense attorneys, juries, and judges to ensure that justice is done. But justice in a criminal case begins with prosecutorial discretion.

Because of the problems that are inherent in the testimony of jailhouse snitches, prosecutors should not be permitted to use them at trial. Allowing prosecutors to obtain convictions based on testimony from jail informants is wrong. The testimony is unreliable and any conviction that is not corroborated by independently sufficient proof is suspect.

Attorney Reese Joye of Charleston, S.C. has passed away. I did not know Reese personally, but after hearing many testimonials from the people who did I can appreciate what an impact he has had on our legal community.

Reese was a founder of the South Carolina Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and of the National College for DUI Defense, and was the first president of SCACDL. He published a multi-volume set of books on DUI defense, and was nationally recognized as an expert in the field.

As news of his passing reached Charleston, friends and colleagues recalled Joye as a tenacious attorney who worked long hours, did his homework and was always the most prepared lawyer in the courtroom. His firm holds the record for the largest personal injury verdict in state history.

Regina McKnight, who was found guilty of homicide by child abuse in 2001 because cocaine was found in her system after her child was stillborn, has been released. Last month the South Carolina Supreme Court granted her post conviction relief petition and ordered a new trial.

Regina pled guilty to involuntary manslaughter and was released on time served today after serving more than 8 years in prison.

Laura L. Loder has joined the Frederick Defense Firm as an associate. She is a recent graduate of the Charleston School of Law and practices exclusively criminal defense. Laura is tough, smart, and a damn good lawyer. She is a welcome addition to the firm.

Following his successful plea to waive his appeals and be executed as soon as possible, David Mark Hill got his wish yesterday.

Hill was convicted of a 1996 triple homicide. He is the first person to be put to death in South Carolina since the U.S. Supreme Court decided that lethal injection was an acceptable method for the government to kill people. He is the 279th person to be executed in the State of South Carolina.

The current policies in Horry County, and probably throughout South Carolina, of aggressive enforcement of CDV laws are counterproductive. I speak to many people who have been arrested and charged with domestic violence. Most tell me that when the police arrive, they are told that if the police are called, someone has to go to jail. When I first began hearing this, I attributed it to a few officers who were acting like jerks, and to some exaggeration by my clients. Over time, however, it has been consistent, and I am hearing the same thing every time. If we are called, someone is going to jail.

In some cases, individuals are being arrested without any evidence of a CDV having occurred - the officer says I have to take someone. In some cases, the victim who calls the police is arrested along with the person who was doing the hitting. They are not always allowed to speak and there are some officers who do not want to talk to anyone at the home before making their arrest. I have seen cases where a third party calls the police and the officer arrests everyone in the house despite there being no independent evidence of CDV.

Law enforcement and the solicitors' offices are receiving additional funding to hire prosecutors for the prosecution of CDV's, and yet persons charged with CDV have no access to appointed defense attorneys. The public defenders do not go to the magistrate court and there is no funding for indigent defense of CDV. In some cases, people are being arrested without any real investigation of the facts, are being prosecuted by a trained advocate, and have no way to defend themselves unless they have resources available to hire a criminal defense lawyer.

I am hearing people say, "if I am ever really beaten by my spouse, the last thing I will do is call the police for help." This policy, written or unwritten, of arresting someone anytime the police are called, is counterproductive. Not asking questions before hauling husband and wife off to jail is counterproductive. Arresting victims is counterproductive. Not providing attorneys to defendants results in numerous wrongful convictions at the magistrate court level.

Law enforcement should not be about a numbers game, and law enforcement + politics = injustice.

Despite all of the attention focused nationally on the overcrowding of our jails and prisons, our attorney general is pushing a bill that will remove the possibility of parole for any felony in South Carolina. The bill would accomplish two main purposes: to eliminate the possibility of parole for felonies, and to create an alternative court for non-violent offenders.

Under the current scheme, a no parole offense is defined by § 23-13-100 as a Class A, B, or C felony, or any crime that is exempt from classification but punishable by a maximum term of 20 years or more. A person who is convicted of a no parole offense is not eligible for parole and cannot be released until they have served at least 85% of their sentence.

The proposed bill, H.4309, would revise § 23-13-100 to include Class D, E, and F felonies, or any crime that is exempt from classification but punishable by a maximum term of 1 year or more, and it would include Class A and B misdemeanors as well.

The proposed bill would also establish a system of "middle courts," modeled after drug courts, but not limited to drug offenses. Horry County Drug Court has been praised as a success. It is a wonderful idea, and in theory it should divert many people away from the prison system. I think we all want the drug court, and the proposed middle court expansion, to work, but we need to step back and take a look at what is happening in drug court:

1) Some people are finishing the program, remaining drug free, and avoiding prison to boot. These are the success stories that we want to hear about. Horry County's drug court began in August of 2005, and has graduated 12 people so far.

2) I am told that most people do not graduate, but I have not seen any numbers on how many have been admitted and how many have flunked out, other than only 12 have graduated in the past 3 years.

3) Before being admitted into the program, the defendant must plead guilty, be sentenced, and then the sentence is deferred pending completion of the program.

4) To be admitted into the program, the defendant must waive any right to appeal or enjoin any decision of the drug court/ middle court judge, and the defendant must waive any right to post conviction relief.

5) If the defendant is dismissed from the program, the defendant does not receive any due process or hearing, and the full sentence is immediately imposed.

So I ask, if most people do not graduate from this program, is it promoting the rehabilitation and re-entry of non-violent offenders into society and reserving the state's prisons for dangerous offenders, or is it giving the prosecutors an easy out to obtain convictions and often lengthy sentences, without the terrible headache of appeals and PCR's? So far, it seems that this bill will not only serve to keep people in prison longer, but it will help the prosecutors to send more people there in the first place.

I am not saying that we should scrap the idea, but I do think that we should make sure that it is achieving its stated goals, and I don't think that this should be used as a way to get around defendant's due process rights.

Bert will be opening a law office in Conway, after working for 9 years at the solicitor's office. I look forward to seeing you fighting the good fight for the wrongfully accused - best of luck to you in your new practice.

The Horry County Police Department arrested Coastal Carolina University Student Joseph Frasco and charged him with assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature (ABHAN) on Saturday. The only reason I write about this is to comment on the compulsion that law enforcement has to provide detailed information about every case to the media. In this case, maybe it will finally backfire on them.

Lt. Myron Creel of the HCPD is quoted here as saying that he charged Mr. Frasco with ABHAN, he was monitoring the alleged victim's condition at the hospital to be sure that the "the charges filed against Frasco are approprate," because "[a]nytime you have a trauma like this . . . there is potential for complications and death;" (translate: we will charge this guy with Murder if we can) and then goes on to say, "[w]e don't really think there was any intent in the incident."

What?

The article begins by saying that Mr. Frasco was charged with ABHAN after accidentally shooting his roommate at close range with a shotgun. Someone correct me if I'm wrong in believing that intent is an essential element that must be present to charge a person with ABHAN. Or that accident is a complete defense to the charges.

I've opened a second office in Florence, S.C. It will not be fully staffed at first, and is more or less a place to meet with my Florence clients and a place to hang my hat when I am trying cases in Florence. I need to update the website with the new information, but I am procrastinating. I'll get around to it in the next day or two. In the meantime, the number is 843-665-7709, and the location is 215-B Pine Street, next to the old Florence County Library. Only a few blocks from the city-county complex, magistrate and municipal courts, General Sessions, and the Federal Courthouse.

Why open a Florence office? A few reasons - one is because I get a good many calls from people who are facing criminal charges in Florence, and I cannot expect them to drive to the Myrtle Beach office to meet with me. Another reason is because, although Myrtle Beach is now my home, Florence is my hometown, and it just feels right to have an office in my hometown. Also I plan on doing more federal criminal defense in the future, and Florence is the nearest Federal Courthouse.