Could a South Carolina coroner keep a state constable commission without violating dual office holding rules in 1990?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1990. Ask about yours and see what current South Carolina law means for your facts, with citations you can check.
Plain-English summary
In 1990, Berkeley County's coroner-elect asked whether retaining a state constable commission after taking office would violate South Carolina's dual office holding rules. The Attorney General said constitutional amendments meant a state constable position was no longer considered an office for that purpose. The opinion therefore identified no dual office holding obstacle from the combination described.
It separately said the governor retained discretion over appointing constables and that an uncompensated appointment expired sixty days after the appointing governor's term. The office referred the requester to the governor's office or the State Law Enforcement Division about his particular commission.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1990. 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 the AG treat a constable commission as a second public office in 1990?
A: No. It said the amended constitutional provisions no longer treated the constable position as an office for dual office holding.
Q: Did the opinion guarantee the coroner could keep his commission?
A: No. It said the governor retained appointment discretion and referred the individual commission question to the governor's office or State Law Enforcement Division.
Background and statutory framework
The letter asked about the interaction of coroner service and an existing state constable commission. The opinion cited amendments to article XVII, section 1A and article VI, section 3 of the state constitution, then discussed Code section 23-1-60 on appointments and their expiration.
Citations and references
- South Carolina Constitution, article XVII, section 1A and article VI, section 3: amended dual office holding provisions described in the opinion.
- South Carolina Code section 23-1-60: constable appointments and expiration discussed in the opinion.
Official title
Concerning whether a dual office holding situation exists if a state constable simultaneously serves as coroner.
Requester
Mr. Wade Arnette, Coroner-Elect, Berkeley County
Source
- Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/december-11-1990-6/
- Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/00146898.pdf
Original opinion text
T. TRAVIS MEDLOCK
A TTORNEV GENERAL
REMBERT C. DENNIS BUILOING
POST OFFICE BOX 11549
COLUMBIA. S.C 29211
TELEPHONE 803- 734-3970
FACSIMILE 803·253-6283
December 11, 1990
l.
I
Mr. Wade Arnette
Coroner-Elect for Berkeley County
Box 486
Moncks Corner, South Carolina 29461
Dear Mr. Arnette:
In a letter to this Off ice you questioned whether you may retain your state constable's commission after you are sworn in as coroner. You particularly questioned any dual office holding prohibitions in such regard. Article XVII, Section lA and Article VI, Section 3 of the State Constitution have been amended to provide that the position of state constable is no longer considered an off ice for dual off ice holding purposes. See: Ops. Atty. Gen. dated September 6, 1990, May 2, 1989, January 31, 1989. Of course, pursuant to Section 23-1-60 of the Code the Governor retains discretion as to the appointment of individuals as constables. Also, pursuant to such provision "all appointments of constables ... without compensation shall expire sixty days after the expiration of the term of the Governor making such appointment." Therefore, you should contact the Governor's office and/or the State Law Enforcement Division as to your constable's commission. With kind regards, I am Very truly yours,
d«J. v#(i.,t,JJ____
Charles H. Richardson
Assistant Attorney General
CHR/an
REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY:
Robert D. Cook
Executive Assistant for Opinions
What does South Carolina law say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 1990. Ezel checks the current South Carolina statutes and case law, applies them to your situation, and cites what it relies on.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace