The DUI Stop
S.C. Code 56-5-2930 and S.C. Code 56-5-2950 — impairment, the breath test, and the video
Two offenses. Driving under the influence is driving while under the influence of alcohol, other drugs or both to the extent that the person's faculties to drive are materially and appreciably impaired. Driving with an unlawful alcohol concentration is driving with an alcohol concentration of eight one-hundredths of one percent or more.
A first offense of either carries a fine of $400 or forty eight hours to thirty days, with higher minimums where the concentration is at least ten one-hundredths but less than sixteen one-hundredths of one percent, and higher again at sixteen one-hundredths or more. A first offense may be tried in magistrates court.
- The person does not have to take the test or give the samples, but refusing means the privilege to drive is suspended or denied for at least six months, with the option of ending it by enrolling in the Ignition Interlock Device Program, and the refusal may be used in court.
- Taking the test with a result of fifteen one-hundredths of one percent or more means a suspension of at least one month, with the same option.
- The person may have a qualified person of their choosing do additional independent tests at their own expense.
- The person may request a contested case hearing within thirty days of the notice of suspension.
Those are among the things a person arrested for driving under the influence is given in writing and told aloud, with the video running, before any test. A driver is considered to have consented to tests of breath, blood or urine if arrested for an offense arising out of driving under the influence, and is offered a breath test first.
On video. The person's conduct at the incident site and at the breath test site is recorded. At the scene, the recording begins no later than the officer's blue lights, includes any field sobriety tests, and shows the arrest and the Miranda advisement. Refusing a field sobriety test is not disobeying a police command.
Testing is also limited by the Fourth Amendment. The Supreme Court of the United States has held that a breath test may be taken without a warrant as part of a lawful arrest for drunk driving and a blood test may not; that a driver may not be criminally punished for refusing a blood test where no warrant was obtained; and that the natural fall of alcohol in the blood does not by itself create an emergency excusing a warrant in every case, which is decided case by case on all the circumstances. Those holdings are a floor: a state's own constitution and statutes can give more protection than they do, never less.
Second and later offenses carry fines and terms that rise with the concentration, and the section has more on the Alcohol and Drug Safety Action Program. Failing to produce the video is not alone a ground for dismissal where the officer swears to one of the reasons the section lists. Whether a particular test or stop was lawful is a question for a licensed South Carolina attorney.
Sources for this section (6)
- S.C. Code 56-5-2930 — Operating motor vehicle while under influence of alcohol or drugs
- S.C. Code 56-5-2933 — Driving with an unlawful alcohol concentration
- S.C. Code 56-5-2950 — Implied consent to testing for alcohol or drugs
- S.C. Code 56-5-2953 — Incident site and breath test site video recording
- Birchfield v. North Dakota, 579 U.S. 438 (2016) — A breath test may be taken incident to arrest, a blood draw needs a warrant
- Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S. 141 (2013) — The natural fall of blood alcohol is not by itself an emergency justifying a warrantless draw
Legal information, not legal advice. Verified as of October 2026. Applying it to a particular situation is the work of a licensed South Carolina attorney.