Could a South Carolina police department trade seized weapons or abandoned property for equipment?

Plain-English summary

A West Columbia police lieutenant asked whether the department could trade weapons, jewelry, tools and other seized or abandoned items for equipment for its officers. The July 2001 informal opinion did not give one rule for the whole inventory. It said the authority to trade an item depended on what it was and how the police acquired it.

The letter identified statutes allowing a trade of certain confiscated pistols or other crime-related weapons with a dealer licensed to sell pistols in South Carolina. A different pistol-confiscation statute permitted use, transfer to another agency, or destruction, but did not provide for a trade. For recovered stolen or abandoned property, the AG read the statute as allowing auction, destruction, agency use after inventory, or limited donation, but not exchange for equipment. The AG said any bidding duty turned on West Columbia’s local procurement ordinance, which the office did not determine.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2001. 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

Police departments holding weapons

The opinion allowed a dealer trade for weapons confiscated under the two statutes that expressly mentioned trading. It distinguished pistols seized under Section 23-31-190, for which the listed disposal choices omitted trading. A found pistol not returned to its finder or owner could fall under the recovered-property rules instead.

Municipal officials handling other property

The AG said recovered stolen or abandoned property could not be used as currency to buy equipment under the cited statute. The letter also said a municipality’s own procurement ordinance could determine whether an otherwise authorized exchange required bidding.

Common questions

Could police trade every confiscated gun for equipment? A: No. The opinion distinguished statutes that expressly authorized a trade with a licensed pistol dealer from a pistol-confiscation statute that did not.

Could officers trade abandoned jewelry or tools?
A: The AG said the recovered-property law listed disposal options but did not authorize using those items as payment for equipment.

Would an equipment trade require multiple bids?
A: The letter left that to West Columbia’s procurement ordinance. It said an ordinance like the state procurement code likely would cover an exchange of assets.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion compared the weapon-specific disposal provisions with S.C. Code Ann. §27-21-20 governing recovered stolen or abandoned property. It treated the Uniform Unclaimed Property Act as mainly governing intangible property, rather than the weapons, jewelry and tools in the request. It did not identify a universal rule for all seized assets.

Citations and references

• § 16-23-405(2): one provision permitting a licensed-dealer trade of confiscated weapons.
• Section 23-31-190: pistol-confiscation provision without trade authority.
• S.C. Code Ann. §27-21-20: disposition of recovered stolen or abandoned property.
• State v. Blackmon: the letter’s rule against enlarging a statute beyond its words.

Official title

“concerning the disposition of seized or abandoned property that is in the custody of our police department.”

Requester

Jackie F. Brothers, Patrol Lieutenant, Police Department, City of West Columbia

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/july-3-2001/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/01july3brothers.pdf

Original opinion text

The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
CHARLIE CONDON
ATTORNEY GENERAL

July 3, 2001
Jackie F. Brothers, Patrol Lieutenant
Police Department, City of West Columbia
P.O. Box 4044
West Columbia, South Carolina 29171
Re: Disposition of Seized/Abandoned Property
Dear Patrol Lieutenant Brothers:
In a letter to this Office, you have requested "an opinion ... concerning the disposition of seized or abandoned property that is in the custody of our police department." By way of background, you indicate that: We have a large quantity of items including weapons, jewelry, tools, and other property that has gone through the process required clearing the items for disposition. We are interested in trading these items for equipment to outfit our officers, particularly our Community Emergency Response Team. Specifically, you pose two questions for respon~e: "[t]he first is the legality of trading these itcrr.s for departmental equipment ... [t]he second would be regular bidding requirements wouid apply requiring us to obtain multiple bids from vendors for such an exchange." Unfortunately, your questions cannot be resolved with a simple yes or no response. Depending on the type of property and the way in which that property came into the custody of the West Columbia Police Department, a number of different statutes may apply. Those statutes include, but may not be limited to, S.C. Code Ann. §§16-23-10 et seq. (Offenses Involving Weapons), 23-31-190 (Regulation of Pistols), 27-21-10 et seq. (Disposition of Confiscated and Stolen Property), and 27-18-10 et seq. (Uniform Unclaimed Property Act). I will address the application of each in turn. Disposition of Weapons When a pistol has been confiscated as the result of a violation of Article 1, Chapter 23 of

REMBERT

c. DENNIS BUILDING •

~~~~

POST OFFJCE Box 11549

•

COLUMBIA,

s.c. 29211-1549

•

TELEPHONE: 803-734-3970

•

FACSIMILE: 803-253-6283

Jackie F. Brothers, Patrol Lieutenant
July 6, 2001
Page 2

Title 16 (specifically §§ 16-23-20 and 30), that pistol must be delivered to the chief of police or
sheriff, depending on the location of the violation. See S.C. Code Ann. §16-23-SO(B).
Subsection (B) further provides that:
The law enforcement agency that receives the confiscated pistol may use it within the
agency, transfer it to another law enforcement agency for the lawful use of that
agency, trade it with a retail dealer licensed to sell pistols in this State for a pistol or
any other equipment approved by the agency, or destroy it.

I

Additionally, when a weapon has been used in the commission of or in furtherance of a crime, §1623-405 provides that the weapon must be confiscated. In that section of the Code," 'weapon' means
firearm (rifle, shotgun, pistol, or similar device that propels a projectile through the energy of an
explosive), a knife with a blade over two inches long, a blackjack, a metal pipe or pole, or any other
type of device or object which may be used to inflict bodily injury or death." Similar to §16-23-50,
§ 16-23-405(2) provides that the confiscated weapon:
... must be delivered to the chief of police of the municipality or to the sheriff of
the county if the violation occurred outside the corporate limits of a municipality.
The law enforcement agency that receives the confiscated weapon may use it
within the agency, transfer it to another law enforcement agency for the lawful use
of that agency, trade it with a retail dealer licensed to sell pistols in this State for a
pistol or other equipment approved by the agency, or destroy it.
Therefore, when the West Columbia Police Department has come into possession of a
pistol or other weapon pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. §§16-23-50 or 405, an exchange such as that
contemplated would appear to be authorized, as long as the items are traded with a "retail dealer
licensed to sell pistols in this State."

~

!

When a pistol has been found by a citizen and turned into the police department, the
procedure is somewhat different. Section 16-23-55 provides the "procedure for returning lost
pistol[ s]" and states that "upon request of the individual who found and turned over the pistol,
the agency shall return the pistol to this person ... " unless the pistol is stolen, has been used in the
commission of a crime or the true owner is located. Section 16-23-55 does not address the
procedure to be employed when the individual who found the pistol does not request its return.
However, as there is no statutory authority for the transfer of ownership or ownership rights (i.e.
dominion and control) of the pistol to the law enforcement agency, it is likely that the pistol
would be subjected to disposition in accordance with S.C. Code Ann. §27-21-20, discussed
below.
Section 16-23-460 provides that, with some exceptions, any person carrying a concealed

Jackie F. Brothers, Patrol Lieutenant
July 6, 2001
Page 3

deadly weapon is guilty of a misdemeanor and that the person "must forfeit to the county, or, if
convicted in a municipal court, to the municipality the concealed weapon ... " As a general
matter, ownership of the weapon would pass to the municipality or county at the time of
forfeiture. The governing body of the county or municipality would be able to exercise the rights
of ownership over the pistol in accordance with the general law. Whether that body chose to use
the weapon as suggested in your letter would be a policy decision.

I
I

Finally, Article 3, Chapter 31 of Title 23 regulates dealers and the purchase of pistols.
Section 23-31-190 provides the consequences for a violation of Article 3 and states, in pertinent
part, as follows:
In addition to the penalty provided in this section the pistol involved in the violation
must be confiscated. The pistol must be delivered to the chief of police of the
municipality or to the sheriff of the county, if the violation occurred outside the
corporate limits of a municipality. The law enforcement agencies that receive the
confiscated pistols may use them within their department, transfer them to another
law enforcement agency, or destroy them.
While §23-31-190 provides that the pistol confiscated as a result of a violation of Article 3 must
be delivered to the chief of police or sheriff just as in §§ 16-23-50 & 405, there is no provision for
the trading of the pistol for equipment. Accordingly, it is my opinion that such pistols should not
be exchanged for other equipment for use within the police department.

I

I realize that the above opinions result in what appear to be inconsistent conclusions,
however, this Office has previously opined that, where State statutes specifically address the
manner in which certain weapons must be disposed of, procedures in conflict with those statutes
should not be followed. See OP. ATTY. GEN. (Dated October 2, 1985). Further, statutes' words
must be given their plain and ordinary meaning without resort to a forced or subtle construction
which would work to limit or to expand the statutes operation. State v. Blackmon, 304 S.C. 270,
403 S.E.2d 660 (1991).

Disposition of Confiscated and Stolen Property
(§27-21-10 et seq.)
S.C. Code Ann. §27-21-20 deals with the disposition of stolen or abandoned property
which has been recovered by a sheriff of a county or chief of police of a municipality. In a prior
opinion, this Office has also stated that §27-21-20 would probably be applicable to lost property
turned into the law enforcement agency which is unclaimed by the true owner and abandoned by
the finder. See OP. ATTY. GEN. (Dated September 9, 1997). After a series of steps designed to
notify the owner of the location of the property, the sheriff or chief of police is given a few

Jackie F. Brothers, Patrol Lieutenant
July 6, 2001
Page4

options of disposal.
Section 27-2 l-20(B) provides that the sheriff or chief of police "may sell at public
auction any recovered stolen or abandoned property ... [and] shall tum over all proceeds of the
sale to the county or municipal treasurer who shall pay any debts incurred in holding the sale and
then shall place the final proceeds in a special fund." Further, Section 27-21-20(C) provides an
alternative means of disposition if the property is not sold at auction or reclaimed and states as
follows:

I
I

(C) If after diligent efforts the owner of the property cannot be ascertained or if the
property is not reclaimed or sold at public auction, the sheriff of a county or chief of
police of a municipality may dispose of any recovered stolen or abandoned property
as provided in this subsection.
( 1) Property that is not suitable for sale, including, but not limited to,
clothing, food, prescription drugs, weapons, household cleaning products, chemicals,
or items that appear nonusable, including, but not limited to:
(a) electric components that appear to have been skeletonized, where parts
have been removed and are no longer in working order; or
(b) items that have been broken up and only pieces exist may be destroyed by
the jurisdiction holding the property.
(2) The sheriff or chief of police may use any property recovered by his
jurisdiction ifthe property is placed on the jurisdiction's inventory as property of the
jurisdiction.
(3) The sheriff or chief of police, with the consent of the appropriate
governing body, may tum over to any organization exempt from tax under Section
501 (c) 3 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, items of abandoned or recovered
property that may be used for the betterment of that organization. However, the
accrued value of the items given to an individual organization as provided above by
a sheriff or chief of police shall not exceed a value of one thousand dollars in the
respective government entity's fiscal year.
The above sections give the sheriff or chief of police four options for disposing of the
abandoned property. Those four options are 1) public auction with proceeds to treasurer; 2)
destruction; 3) use of the property; and 4) donating the property to certain tax exempt
organizations. Nowhere does the statute allow the sheriff or chief of police to use the abandoned
property essentially as currency to purchase other equipment. Again, this Office cannot interpret
a statute in such a manner as would expand its scope. State v. Blackmon, 304 S.C. 270, 403
S.E.2d 660 (1991 ). Accordingly, it is my opinion that property covered by Section 27-21-10 et
seq. may not be exchanged for other equipment.

Jackie F. Brothers, Patrol Lieutenant
July 6, 2001
Page 5

Uniform Unclaimed Property Act
(§27-18-10 et seq.)
The Uniform Unclaimed Property Act is intended to provide a comprehensive scheme
regulating the disposition of various categories of "abandoned" intangible property. Under the
Act, §27-18-20 defines "intangible property" as:

I

monies, checks, drafts, deposits, interest, dividends, and income; credit balances,
customer overpayments, gift certificates, security deposits, refunds, credit memos,
unpaid wages, unused airline tickets, and unidentified remittances; stocks and other
intangible ownership interests in business associations; monies deposited to redeem
stocks, bonds, coupons and other securities, or to make distributions; amounts due
and payable under the terms of insurance policies; and amounts distributable from
a trust or custodial fund established under a plan to provide health, welfare, pension,
vacation, severance, retirement, death, stock purchase, profit sharing, employee
savings, supplemental unemployment insurance, or similar benefits.
The Act, therefore, would most likely not be applicable to tangible property such as weapons,
jewelry and tools. Further, this Office has previously opined that cash, in certain circumstances,
recovered by a law enforcement agency should be disposed of pursuant to §27-21-20, rather than the
Uniform Unclaimed Property Act. See OP. ATTY. GEN. (Dated January 6, 1998). In any event, should
your department be in possession of intangible property covered by the Act, the disposition of that
property would have to be accomplished pursuant to its requirements. Without addressing the
specifics, the Act does not allow for the exchange contemplated in your letter.
Biddin~ Requirements

Whether the exchange contemplated would be subject to the "regular bidding
requirements" depends on the local ordinances of the City of West Columbia. If the City has
passed a procurement ordinance similar to the South Carolina Consolidated Procurement Code, it
is likely that such an ordinance would apply. As, according to the Code, '"procurement' means
buying, purchasing, renting, leasing, or otherwise acquiring any supplies," it is apparent that an
exchange of one asset for another would fit the definition.
Conclusion
As you can see, this area of the law can be quite complicated. I have attempted to address
your questions as thoroughly as possible, but I cannot say that the above represents an exhaustive
list of applicable statutes and laws. As the answer to your question may depend on a number of
factors surrounding the individual item which the Department wishes to exchange, I would

Jackie F. Brothers, Patrol Lieutenant
July 6, 2001
Page 6

suggest that you contact your City Attorney and seek his/her advice as to the proper course of
action.
This letter is an informal opinion only. It has been written by a designated Assistant
Attorney General and represents the position of the undersigned attorney as to the specific
question asked. It has not, however, been personally scrutinized by the Attorney General and not
officially published in the manner of a formal opinion.

I
Assistant Attorney General

I

.

,

'