746 S.E.2d 347
S.C. Ct. App.2013Background
- Henkel was indicted for DUI after a 2008 incident on I-385 in Greenville County with an unresolved driver identity.
- SCHP Sergeant Hiott arrested Henkel after locating him four hours post-incident; Miranda rights were read in an ambulance and again in the patrol car.
- HGN and ABC tests were conducted; the ambulance setting prevented video recording of those tests.
- Two videotapes were admitted: defense Exhibit 1 and State Exhibit 2, neither showing Miranda warnings or HGN/ABC tests in the recording.
- Henkel moved to dismiss the indictment for noncompliance with section 56-5-2953, which requires incident-site videotaping.
- The trial court denied dismissal; Henkel was convicted; the appellate court reverses, concluding mandatory videotaping was not conformed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether noncompliance with 56-5-2953 requires dismissal | Henkel argues noncompliance mandates dismissal. | Henkel contends videotapes did not meet the statute's requirements. | Dismissal required for nonconforming videotape |
| Effect of front-blue-light activation on start of videotaping | Video began after Miranda and tests; front lights not activated, so no proper start. | Camera activated as soon as practicable; non-front-light activation allowed under exception. | Failure to begin recording at required start violated A(1)(a) |
| Applicability of 56-5-2953(B) exceptions | Exceptions do not cure failure to include Miranda warnings and test videos. | Exceptions may excuse noncompliance when started as practicable. | Exceptions do not cure missing Miranda warnings; must begin conforming recordings |
| Whether Miranda warnings and HGN/ABC recordings must be included | Recordings should capture warnings and tests if administered. | Audio/video partially captured; substantial compliance argued. | Noncompliance with Miranda warning video requires dismissal |
Key Cases Cited
- Town of Mt. Pleasant v. Roberts, 393 S.C. 332 (2011) (per se dismissal for 56-5-2953 violation in DUI case)
- City of Rock Hill v. Suchenski, 374 S.C. 12 (2007) (dismissal as remedy when §56-5-2953(A) violated)
- Murphy v. State, 392 S.C. 626 (Ct.App.2011) (noncompliance not mitigated by exceptions warrants dismissal)
- State v. Baccus, 367 S.C. 41 (2006) (appellate review of trial court factual findings)
- State v. Wilson, 345 S.C. 1 (2001) (standard of review for criminal appeals)
- State v. Quattlebaum, 338 S.C. 441 (2000) (evidence and procedural standards in DUI cases)