Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the DUI Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House advances committee amendment to strengthen DUI penalties and expand testing authority, members warn of legal risk
Summary
The House Judiciary committee amendment to S 52 raised penalties, created a felony DUI second degree for moderate bodily injury, and broadened blood testing with probable-cause limits; supporters called it a modernization of DUI law while some members warned the blood-draw provisions could prompt constitutional challenges.
Representative Robbie Robbins, speaking for the Judiciary Committee, described a package of changes to Senate Bill 52 that he said "strengthens the DUI laws in the state of South Carolina." Robbins summarized the committee amendment as increasing penalties for DUI and related offenses, creating a new felony DUI second degree for moderate bodily injury and expanding the statutory framework for videotaping and blood testing.
On evidence and testing, Robbins said the amendment allows blood testing when probable cause exists that drugs or combined substances are involved but confines sampling to licensed medical facilities and medically trained personnel; the committee removed provisions that would have allowed roadside blood draws. "By requiring a probable cause determination prior to blood testing, the committee is following state Supreme Court case law," Robbins said, describing the approach as a balance between individual liberty and prosecutorial needs.
The amendment also changes how videotaped Miranda advisories are handled, allowing recordings that "reasonably document the advisement" rather than requiring full-scene video and making technical defects insufficient by themselves to dismiss a case. The committee adopted provisions to require ignition interlock devices for certain repeat offenders or when a prior conviction combined with a BAC of 0.15 or higher is present.
Several members urged caution. Representative Justin Bamberg said he worries the blood-draw provisions amount to the state "holding a privilege that's bestowed on you hostage," arguing the proposal risks constitutional challenges and could lead to appellate litigation. Other members raised practical concerns about how rural residents who rely on driving would be affected and asked for data on DUI trends.
After extended debate and several motions, the House adopted the committee amendment and later recorded a second-reading vote on S 52. The clerk announced that Senate Bill 52 received second reading on the floor by recorded tally.
