 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Sykes v. Hiatt6/5/1990
, 262 S.C. 89, 91, 202 S.E.2d 645, 646 (1974).
Under G.S. 15A-302, North Carolina now also permits criminal process by issuance and service of a citation. General Statute 15A-921(1) provides that a citation may serve as the pleading in a criminal case. A citation directs a person to appear in court and answer a misdemeanor or infraction charge or charges. G.S. 15A-302(a).
In view of these statutory changes which now permit the institution of legal proceedings without a warrant, Wright, supra, and Donnelly, supra, do not preclude revocation of petitioner's
license in this case. From the face of the record and the Uniform Traffic Ticket issued to petitioner the following facts are made to appear. Defendant was stopped on Highway I-95 south of Hardeeville, South Carolina, on 31 October 1987 at 2:49 a.m. He was taken to jail, where he was given a breathalyzer examination at 4:20 a.m. by an officer of the South Carolina Highway Patrol. Petitioner's blood alcohol level was 0.12. In lieu of jail, a cash bond in the amount of $218.00 was set and accepted by D. Youngblood. Petitioner was summoned to appear before trial officer R. E. Grayson on 16 November 1987 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall of Hardeeville, South Carolina. On 16 November 1987 petitioner did not appear and trial officer Grayson entered a disposition of "forfeited bond." The face of the violator's copy of the ticket states, "Present this summons to the trial officer shown above." The ticket further states in bold letters:
If you forfeit ball . . . this violation will be placed against your driving record. Failure to comply with the terms of this summons will result in the suspension of your drivers license by your home state.
Petitioner stipulated that he received a copy of this Uniform Traffic Ticket.
Under S.C. Code Ann. § 56-5-2940, the forfeiture of bail in a driving under the influence case is the equivalent of conviction for purposes of punishment. See State v. Langford, 223 S.C. 20, 73 S.E.2d 854 (1953). General Statute 20-24(c) defines "conviction" as a "final conviction of a criminal offense." General Statute 20-16(a)(7) authorizes the DMV to suspend the license of an operator upon a showing by its records that the licensee "has committed an offense in another state, which if committed in this State would be grounds for suspension or revocation." Driving while impaired is grounds for revocation in this State. G.S. 20-17(2). Respondent stipulated to the breathalyzer report showing 0.12 blood alcohol concentration. Under G.S. 20-138.1(a)(2) a person who has an alcohol concentration of 0.10 or more at any relevant time after driving commits the offense of driving while impaired. From the evidence in this case, defendant clearly committed an offense in South Carolina for which his license could be revoked if committed in North Carolina, and his forfeiture of bond amounted to a conviction of the offense of impaired driving in South Carolina.
{PA}
Page 693} Petitioner also contends the trial court erred in taking judicial notice of the similarity between the South Carolina impaired driving statutes and the North Carolina statute. This argument is without merit, as G.S. 8-4 permits the court to take judicial notice of other states' statutes.
Based on the foregoing, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Disposition
Affirmed.
|