Does a conviction for possessing a stolen vehicle count as a prior property offense for value-based sentence enhancement?

Plain-English summary

The Attorney General said a prior conviction for possessing a stolen vehicle under § 16-21-80 qualified as a property offense for enhancement under § 16-1-57. The stolen-vehicle statute scaled punishment by the vehicle's value, matching the enhancement statute's focus on offenses whose imprisonment term depended on property value. The office compared that structure with the shoplifting offense discussed in State v. Lewis.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2003. 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.

Historical summary

Prosecutors and courts

The opinion treated the value-based penalty tiers in the stolen-vehicle statute as placing prior convictions within the property-offense enhancement provision.

Defendants

The opinion addressed classification of a prior conviction, not whether any particular defendant had the number or type of convictions required for an enhanced sentence.

Common questions

Did the AG count possession of a stolen vehicle as a prior qualifying offense?
Yes, under the statutes discussed in the opinion.

Why did the vehicle's value matter?
The statutory punishment tiers depended on that value.

Background and statutory framework

Charleston police asked whether a conviction under § 16-21-80 counted under § 16-1-57. The opinion applied the statutes' plain language and analogized to the value-based shoplifting statute discussed in State v. Lewis.

Archive note

The official landing-page URL contains a different year, while the opinion itself is dated August 1, 2003. The issued date above follows the opinion text.

Citations and references

The opinion cited S.C. Code Ann. §§ 16-21-80 and 16-1-57 and State v. Lewis.

Official title

Regarding the classification of a conviction for possession of a stolen vehicle under S.C. Code Ann. §16-21-80.

Requester

Sergeant Peter Farrell, Central Investigations, Charleston Police Department

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/august-1-2013/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2003/08/03aug-1-Farrell.pdf

Original opinion text

[

The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
HENRY MCMASTER
ATTORNEY GENERAL

August 1, 2003

Sergeant Peter Farrell
Central Investigations
Charleston Police Department
180 Lockwood Boulevard
Charleston, SC 29403
Dear Sergeant Farrell:
You have requested an advisory opinion from this Office regarding the classification of a conviction for possession of a stolen vehicle under S.C. Code Ann. §16-21-80. You have asked if such a conviction qualifies as a prior property offense for enhancement purposes under Section 16-1-57 of the Code. Law/Analysis

I

It is a cardinal rule that the primary purpose in interpreting statutes is to ascertain the intent of the General Assembly. State v. Martin, 293 S.C. 46, 358 S.E.2d 697 (1987). A statute must receive a practical, reasonable, and fair interpretation consonant with the purpose, design and policy of the lawmakers. Caughman v. Cola. Y.M.C.A., 212 S.C. 337, 47 S.E.2d 788 (1948). Words must be given their plain and ordinary meaning without resort to subtle or forced construction to limit or expand the statute's operation. State v. Blackmon, 304 S.C. 270, 403 S.E.2d 660 (1990).

I

~

Based on these general principles of statutory interpretation, it is my opinion that a prior conviction pursuant to Section 16-21-80 of the Code would qualify as a property offense for enhancement purposes under Section 16-1-57. Section 16-1-57 says that: A person convicted of an offense for which the term of imprisonment is contingent upon the value of the property involved must, upon a conviction for a third or subsequent offense, be punished as proscribed for a Ciass F lek:;)'. Section 16-21-80 of the Code criminalizes the receiving, possessing, concealing, selling, or disposing of a stolen vehicle in South Carolina. It says: A person not entitled to the possession of a vehicle who receives, possesses, conceals, sells, or disposes of it, knowing it to be stolen or converted under circumstances constituting a crime, is guilty of a:
}

REMBiiRTUDEN]'llSBUILD!NG. POST0FFICEBoxll549. COLUMBJA,S.C.29211-1549. TELEPHONE:803-734-3970. FACSIMD.E:803-253-6283 (C>c/ ~

t&~/,P '-#

Sergeant Farrell
Page2
August 1, 2003

(1) misdemeanor triable in magistrate's court if the value of the vehicle is one thousand dollars or less. Upon conviction, the person must be fined, imprisoned, or both, not more than is permitted by law without presentment or indictment by the grand jury; (2) felony and upon conviction, must be fined in the discretion of the court or imprisoned not more than five years, or both, ifthe value of the vehicle is more than one thousand dollars but less than five thousand dollars; (3) felony and upon conviction, must be fined in the discretion of the court or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both, if the value of the vehicle is five thousand dollars or more.

•
"I
I

I

It appears that the crime of possession of a stolen vehicle falls under the definition of an "offense for which the term of imprisonment is contingent upon the value of the property involved." The punishment section for the property crime of shoplifting, in S.C. Code Ann. § 16-13-11 O(B), is practically identical to the punishment section for possession of a stolen vehicle. In State v. Lewis, 325 S.C. 324, 478 S.E.2d 696 (App. 1996), the Court of Appeals held that shoplifting qualifies as an offense for which the term ofimprisonment is contingent upon the value of the property involved. Therefore, under Section 16-1-57, and a third or subsequent conviction for such an offense should be classified as Class E felony, punishable up to ten years in prison. See S.C. Code Ann .
§ l 6-l-20(A)(5). It is the opinion of this Office that, pursuant to the plain language of the statute, the courts would similarly classify a prior conviction for possession of a stolen vehicle as an enhancing offense under Section 16-1-57. Conclusion Based on the foregoing, it is my opinion that a prior conviction pursuant to Section 16-21-80 of the Code would qualify as a property offense for enhancement purposes under Section 16-1-57.

David K. Avant
Assistani Attorney General