Murphy v. State
392 S.C. 626
S.C. Ct. App.2011Background
- Murphy was stopped April 4, 2007 for swerving; arrested for DUI after field sobriety tests and a 0.13 breath result (Datamaster).
- A dashboard video captured the stop; it recorded Murphy walking a line only from the knees up and did not show all tests.
- A horizontal gaze nystagmus test was conducted with Murphy facing away from the camera and near the edge of the camera view; officer explained repositioning due to blue lights.
- Murphy moved to suppress the videotape and the breath test results pre-trial (video not fully recording tests; post-arrest recording).
- Murphy contends Datamaster records were insufficient because the device underwent repairs 16 days after the test; she cross-examined SLED repair records.
- The circuit court affirmed the DUI conviction, and Murphy appeals.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the incident-site videotape properly admitted under § 56-5-2953(A)? | Murphy argues video did not comply with the statute. | Murphy asserts lack of full view and incomplete tests violate the statute. | No; video complied with conduct-and-Miranda requirements. |
| Was the Datamaster breath test suppressed due to repair records? | Murphy contends Landon shift requires suppression absent full records. | State satisfied Landon burden; records show machine checks after test. | No; evidence supports State met Landon burden; issue for jury. |
Key Cases Cited
- City of Rock Hill v. Suchenski, 374 S.C. 12 (2007) (dismissal as remedy for noncompliance under §56-5-2953 when noncompliance not mitigated by exceptions)
- State v. Dowd, 306 S.C. 268 (1991) (arrest is ongoing; ends when defendant confined)
- State v. Landon, 370 S.C. 103 (2006) (prima facie prejudice shifts burden to State; records available on-site satisfy statute)