Which South Carolina court surcharge paid for local computer upgrades used to track DUI revenue?

Plain-English summary

South Carolina’s state treasurer asked whether local governments could recover computer upgrades for tracking a DUI surcharge from all court revenue or only from the surcharge earmarked for spinal cord research. In October 2001, the AG agreed with the treasurer: the one-time upgrade and programming costs described in §14-1-211 had to be deducted from subsection (A)(2) surcharge revenue before the remaining money was sent to the state. The statute did not permit taking those costs from all court revenue.

The letter distinguished the general surcharge in subsection (A)(1), retained locally for victim services, from the additional DUI surcharge in subsection (A)(2), destined for a separate research account. The computer-cost deduction appeared in the provision governing the latter stream.

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

Municipal and county finance offices

The AG tied the specified one-time computer costs to the designated DUI surcharge revenue, not to unrelated court collections.

State treasurer

The opinion endorsed the treasurer’s interpretation of the allocation text and the deduction before monthly remittance.

Common questions

Could a local government deduct these costs from every court payment? A: No. The opinion limited the deduction to revenue from the subsection (A)(2) surcharge.

What costs did the letter address?
A: One-time operating and administrative computer upgrade or programming costs related to the surcharges described in the statute.

Background and statutory framework

The letter parsed §14-1-211’s separate surcharge streams and quoted the subsection (B) direction that specified computer costs be deducted from revenue collected under subsection (A)(2). The AG applied that allocation language literally.

Citations and references

• §14-1-211: surcharge and revenue allocation statute interpreted by the AG.

Official title

Asking whether local governments may recoup expenses for computer upgrades related to tracking the DUI surcharge for spinal cord research from all court revenues or whether the deductions fro these expenses should be made only from the one hundred dollar DUI surcharge.

Requester

The Honorable Grady L. Patterson, Jr., State Treasurer

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/october-11-2001/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/01oct-11-patterson.pdf

Original opinion text

l

I
The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
CHARLIE CONDON
ATTORNEY GENERAL

October 11, 2001

I
The Honorable Grady L. Patterson, Jr.
State Treasurer
Wade Hampton State Office Building
Hand Delivery

Dear Mr. Patterson:
You have asked whether local governments may recoup expenses for computer upgrades related to tracking the Dill surcharge for spinal cord research from all court revenues or whether the deductions for these expenses should be made only from the one hundred dollar Dill surcharge. Your question arises under S.C. Code Ann. §14-1-211 (Supp. 2000) which provides for surcharges and directs how they shall be allocated. According to your letter regarding this matter, your Office interprets this statute to allow local governments to recoup the above expenses from the DUI surcharge, but you report that some local governments interpret the statute to permit deductions from all court revenues. I concur with the conclusions of your Office for the reasons discussed below.

I

Subsection (A) provides for the surcharges. Under subsection (A)(l), a one hundred dollar surcharge is imposed on all convictions in general sessions court and a $25.00 surcharge is set for all convictions in magistrates' and municipal court except for misdemeanor traffic violations. This surcharge expressly applies to §§56-5-2930 (Supp. 2000)(unlawful to operate motor vehicle while under influence) and 56-5-2933 (Supp. 2000) (driving with an unlawful alcohol concentration) (Supp. 2000) as well as the other convictions covered by subsection (A)(l). Another $100 surcharge set by § 14-1-211 (A)(2) applies only to §§56-5-2930 and 2933, and I assume that this surcharge is the DUI surcharge to which you prefer. Section 14-1-211 (B) allocates the revenue from the above surcharges. Subsection (B) provides that the subsection A(l) revenue is retained by the jurisdiction which heard or processed the case. The revenue is to be used for various victims services including victims' assistance programs and salaries, equipment including computer equipment and internet access, or other

REMBERT

c. DENNIS BUILDING •

POST OFFICE Box 11549

•

COLUMBIA, S .C . 29211-1549

•

TELEPHONE: 803-734-3970

•

FACSIMILE: 803-253-6283

The Honorable Grady L. Patterson, Jr.
October 11, 2001
Page2

expenditures necessary for providing services to crime victims." Subsection (B) also provides that " ... revenue collected pursuant to subsection (A)(2) must be paid over to the State Treasurer monthly and placed in a separate account to be used for spinal cord research by the Medical University of South Carolina" and this subsection further provides as follows:

I
I

All one-time operating and administrative costs for municipal and county governments related to computer upgrades or programming related to these surcharges shall be deducted from the revenue collected pursuant to subsection (A)(2) by municipal and county governments before remission of these funds to the State Treasurer. All operating, personnel, and administrative costs and expenses of the Spinal Cord Injury Research Board and its programs as established in Article 5, Chapter 38 of Title 44, must be paid for through revenue collected pursuant to subsection (A)(2) and deposited in this separate account. A report detailing the use of these funds must be furnished to the General Assembly on an annual basis. (emphasis added) The "... primary function in interpreting a statute is to ascertain the intention of the legislature." South Carolina Department ofHighways and Public Transportation v. Dickinson, 288 S.C. 134, 341 S.E. 2d 134 (1986). "Where the terms of a statute are clear and unambiguous, there is no room for interpretation and we must apply them according to their literal meaning." Id Subsection 14-1-21 l(B) plainly states that "[a]ll one-time" costs for the computer upgrades and programming" ... related to these surcharges shall be deducted from the revenue collected pursuant to subsection (A)(2)." (emphasis added). Accordingly, the deductions for computer upgrades related to tracking the DUI surcharge for spinal cord research should be made only from the subsection (A)(2) revenue. This letter is an informal opinion. It has been written by the designated Assistant Deputy Attorney General and represents the opinion of the undersigned attorney as to the specific questions asked. It has not, however, been personally reviewed by the Attorney General nor officially published in the manner of a formal opinion. If you have further questions, please let me know.