State v. Alexander
818 S.E.2d 455
S.C.2018Background
- Around 11:30 p.m., a 911 call to Goose Creek PD reported a vehicle on U.S. Highway 176; Officer Hadden (Goose Creek) was dispatched and arrived within minutes.
- Officer Hadden found the vehicle partially off the roadway in a ditch, engine running, driver (Respondent) nearby and partially undressed; he suspected a possible medical emergency or sexual assault, then possible intoxication.
- Dispatch confirmed the roadway was inside city limits but the ditch/shoulder where the vehicle rested lay a few feet outside the city boundary.
- Officer Hadden remained with Respondent (a conceded detention) for ~15 minutes awaiting a state trooper; he did not perform sobriety tests. The state trooper arrived, tested, arrested, and charged Respondent with DUI.
- Magistrate court dismissed charges, holding Hadden lacked authority to detain because the vehicle was outside municipal limits; circuit court and court of appeals affirmed. State petitioned for certiorari.
- The Supreme Court reversed, holding S.C. Code § 17-13-45 (and § 5-7-155 support) authorized Hadden to respond and detain pending the trooper’s arrival; case remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a municipal officer may detain a person when dispatched to a 911 distress call that later proves to be just outside city limits | Respondent: Hadden lacked jurisdiction because the vehicle rested outside city limits, so detention was unlawful | State: § 17-13-45 extends an officer’s authority when responding to a distress call or request for assistance in an adjacent jurisdiction | Court: § 17-13-45 applied; officer could respond, assess, and detain pending arrival of state trooper |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. McAteer, 340 S.C. 644, 532 S.E.2d 865 (S.C. 2000) (previous decision on municipal officer jurisdiction cited by lower courts but distinguished)
- State v. Boswell, 391 S.C. 592, 707 S.E.2d 265 (S.C. 2011) (multi-jurisdictional agreement context cited and distinguished)
- State v. Harris, 299 S.C. 157, 382 S.E.2d 925 (S.C. 1989) (general rule that municipal officer jurisdiction is limited to municipal boundaries)
- State v. Whitner, 399 S.C. 547, 732 S.E.2d 861 (S.C. 2012) (rules of statutory interpretation cited for reviewing § 17-13-45)