Could Jonesville police enforce a Union County ordinance inside town limits without adopting it as a town ordinance?

Plain-English summary

The Jonesville police chief asked whether town officers could enforce Union County's criminal drug paraphernalia ordinance inside Jonesville, even though the town had not adopted its own version. The Attorney General said a county ordinance generally governed unincorporated areas, but an agreement between town and county could make it applicable within town limits. Under such an agreement, the town could assign its officers the additional duty of enforcing the ordinance. Copying the ordinance into the town code was unnecessary.

The letter relied on a 1996 AG opinion concerning Pickens. It acknowledged that the state supreme court had not finally approved this kind of agreement in the specific context and that only a court could settle the matter. The opinion was informal and described an agreement as the mechanism, not automatic authority for town officers to enforce every county ordinance.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1998. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Did Jonesville have to adopt Union County's ordinance word for word?
A: The AG said no. It identified a town-county agreement as a way to make a county ordinance applicable inside the town.

Q: Could town officers enforce the county ordinance without such an agreement?
A: The letter did not grant automatic power. Its conclusion depended on an intergovernmental agreement and a municipal assignment of duties.

Q: Had South Carolina's highest court approved this specific arrangement?
A: The letter said no final supreme court approval had been given in that context and left final resolution to courts.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion quoted a May 20, 1996 AG letter about a similar city-county arrangement. It distinguished the usual territorial reach of county ordinances from an ordinance made applicable inside a municipality by agreement.

Citations and references

• May 20, 1996 AG opinion, quoted as the basis for the agreement analysis.

Official title

Asking as to whether a municipal police officer can enforce county ordinances.

Requester

Greg Holland, Chief of Police, Jonesville Police Department

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/april-21-1998-1/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/98april21holland.pdf

Original opinion text

The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
CHARLES MOLONY CONDON
ATTORNEY GENERAL

April 21, 1998

Greg Holland, Chief of Police
Jonesville Police Department
P. 0. Box 785
Jonesville, South Carolina 29353
Re: Informal Opinion
Dear Chief Holland:
You have a.Sked for an opinion as to whether a municipal police officer can enforce county ordinances. You provide the following by way of background:
[r]ecently, the Jonesville Police Department has begun a fairly active drug interdiction program. The Town, in and of itself, does not have a "drug paraphernalia" ordinance, nor do we wish to utilize the State's statute, since it is a civil statute. However, Union County does have an ordinance making the possession of drug paraphernalia a criminal offense, punishable by "any court of competent jurisdiction." The Jonesville Police Department has been making arrests for violations of this ordinance when applicable. Although we have not been challenged in our Municipal Court, one of the Union County Magistrates, as well as some members of the Union County Sheriffs Department have questioned our legal authority to make such cases. I have personally queried the Sixteenth Circuit Solicitor's Office as well as the [legal] ... staff at the S.C. Criminal

1

REMBERT

c. DENNIS ~UILDING

•

. ~(~,~~}

POST OFFICE Box 11549

•

COLUMBIA. S.C. 29211-1549

•

TELEPHON E:

803-734-3970

•

FACSIMILE: 803-253-6283

Chief Holland
Page 2
April 21, 1998
Justice Academy. Both of those offices seem to feel that we do, indeed, have the right and legal authority to enforce Union County Statutes.

I
I

i
I

~

I personally would make the "common sense" argument that municipal officers are entitled to enforce Federal and State laws without special permission, and that since Jonesville is situated in Union County, and its citizens are bound to obey Union County laws, the Jonesville Police Department can therefore enforce those laws.

It has been suggested that the Jonesville Town Council adopt in toto the Union County Ordinance Book, and incorporate it into the Town's statutes. I feel, however, that such is unnecessary. The town has adopted the State's traffic law section, but no other section of the S.C. Code. If such an argument were carried to its logical conclusion, our officers could not charge a murderer with murder because the Town has not adopted the entire Code. Such a requirement would be, in my opinion, ludicrous. Law I Analysis

Your question is answered by an Informal Opinion, dated May 20, 1996, which I am enclosing for your review. There, we presumed that the Town of Pickens had not adopted an identical ordinance to that adopted by the county. While we recognized, based upon previous opinions, that a county ordinance was governing only in the unincorporated areas of the County, we also concluded that "a county ordinance could be made applicable to an incorporated area .. . by virtue of an agreement between the to political subdivision[s], to the effect that county ordinances are applicable within the city limits." Thus, we agreed with your position that it was not necessary to incorporate the county ordinance within the City Code. The Opinion stated as follows:
[t]he foregoing authorities would indicate that the
Sheriff could enforce the ordinance pursuant to any
intergovernmental agreement between the City of Pickens and Pickens County. Such agreement is the recognized mechanism for enforcing a county ordinance in the city limits. While our Supreme Court has not given its approval to such agreements in this context, and only a court can decide the matter with

Chief Holland
Page 3
April 21, 1998
finality ... it would appear to me that the municipal authorities could also enforce the county ordinance. We also noted that "a municipality possesses the authority to assign additional duties to its police officers. Accordingly, it would appear that a municipality, through implementation of an agreement between the city and county as outlined above, could assign its police officers the additional duty of enforcing the county ordinance made applicable to the city pursuant to the agreement." Accordingly, we agree with your position that a county ordinance does not have to be incorporated in the City Code to be enforceable by municipal police officers. This Office believes such ordinance could be enforced by means of a simple agreement between the City and County for joint administration of services. I would suggest that the City Attorney and County Attorney be consulted in this regard concerning the potential execution of such agreement. This letter is an informal opinion only. It has been written by a designated Assistant Deputy Attorney General and represents the position of the undersigned attorney as to the specific questions asked. It has not, however, been personally scrutinized by the Attorney General nor officially published in the manner of a formal opinion. With kind regards, I am Very truly yours,

j,.} 17

l~r
Robert D. Cook
Assistant Deputy Attorney General
RDC/an
Enclosure