Could a South Carolina court order restitution to a sheriff's pawn-shop reimbursement fund?

Plain-English summary

Spartanburg County's sheriff's office described a program that reimbursed pawn shops after officers confiscated stolen property from them. It asked whether a magistrate could order the convicted person to repay the program, restoring money used for those reimbursements. In an informal 2002 letter, the Attorney General said the office appeared to be a third-party payee under the restitution statute, which allowed the court to provide restitution to it.

The statute quoted by the AG also set an order of payment: a primary victim had to receive that victim's portion before offender payments were credited to a secondary victim or third-party payee. The opinion did not assign the fund priority over the property owner or pawn shop, or say restitution was automatic in every case.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2002. 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

Sheriff's offices operating reimbursement programs

The AG classified the sheriff's office's role in the described buyback program as an apparent third-party payee. On that characterization, S.C. Code Ann. § 17-25-324 authorized the court to direct restitution to the office.

Courts and primary victims

The quoted statute left the restitution decision to the court and required payment to the primary victim before any offender payment was credited to a secondary victim or third-party payee. The letter applied the third-party clause to the sheriff's program without deciding each possible victim's share.

Common questions

Could the magistrate name the reimbursement program in a restitution order? A: The AG said the sheriff's office appeared to be a third-party payee and the statute authorized the court to provide restitution to it.

Would the program receive restitution before a primary victim? A: No. The provision quoted by the AG required the primary victim's portion to be paid before a third-party payee was credited.

Did reimbursing a pawn shop make restitution automatic? A: The opinion described restitution as something the court could order; it did not say every reimbursement had to be recovered from an offender.

Background and statutory framework

The sheriff's program used a dedicated fund to compensate pawn shops for stolen property that officers confiscated. The question was whether criminal restitution could replenish that fund. The AG answered by applying the third-party-payee language in S.C. Code Ann. § 17-25-324. The letter expressly describes itself as an informal opinion by an Assistant Attorney General.

Citations and references

• S.C. Code Ann. § 17-25-324: third-party restitution and primary-victim priority provision quoted in the letter.

Official title

Restitution to the Spartanburg County Pawn Shop Buy Back Program.

Requester

Sergeant Doug Smith, Spartanburg County Sheriff's Office

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/may-7-2002/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/02may7smith.pdf

Original opinion text

r

I

The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
CHARLES M . CONDON
AITORNEY GENERAL

r
i

I
!. '·

I

May 7, 2002

Sergeant Doug Smith
Spartanburg County Sheriffs Office
P. 0. Box 771
Spartanburg, South Carolina 29304
Re:

Your Letter of March 4, 2002
Pawn Shop Buy Back Program

Dear Sergeant Smith:

In the above-referenced letter, you indicate that the Spartanburg County Sheriff's Office has enacted a program known as the "Pawn Shop Buy Back Program." In essence, this program provides for the reimbursing of pawn shops from which stolen property has been confiscated by the Sheriff's Office. The reimbursement is made from a fund which has been established specifically for this purpose. Given this background, you ask this Office ifit is " ... appropriate for a magistrate to order restitution to the program when the person charged is found guilty." You further state that the "restitution would be to replace the money that was used to pay the pawn shops when the property was recovered." It appears as though your question is answered by S.C. Code Ann. § 17-25-324. That Section provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

Secondary victims and third-party payees, excluding the offender's insurer, may receive restitution as determined by the court. The Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services shall ensure that a primary victim shall receive his portion of a restitution order before any of the offender's payments are credited to a secondary victim or a third party payee, or both. In the "Pawn Shop Buy Back Program," the Sheriff's Office would appear to be in the role of the "third-party payee." Therefore, Section 17-25-324 would authorize the court to provide for the Sheriff's Office to receive restitution. 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.

REMBERT

c. DENNIS BUILDING

~~)

•

POST OFFICE Box 11549

•

COLUMBIA,

s.c. 29211-1549

•

TELEPHONE: 803-734-3970

•

FACSIMILE: 803-253-6283

Sergeant Smith
Page 2
May 7, 2002

It has not, however, been personally scrutinized by the Attorney General and not officially published in the manner of a formal opinion.

Sincerely,

I
L.

Assistant Attorney General
DKA/an