South Carolina’s court system for handling low-level criminal offenses is garnering attention from national civil rights groups—and not in a good way.
A new report from the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers found that the state’s municipal and magistrate courts, collectively referred to as summary courts, are plagued by a broad range of constitutional violations that threaten to deny civil rights to defendants in the state.
The report found that accused individuals are “rarely” represented by counsel and many are not even told they have a right to an attorney. That’s despite summary courts handling criminal charges that carry serious consequences, including jail time.
“These abuses masquerading as ‘justice’ are a corruption of the legal process and an embarrassment to the people of South Carolina,” the report said.
The report is a compilation of constitutional violations observed by attorneys from the ACLU and the NACDL, who visited 27 different summary courts across the state between December 2014 and July 2015.
In South Carolina, local municipalities have the power to establish summary courts to handle a wide range of offenses, including traffic violations, driving under the influence, drug offenses and property crimes. The penalties for those found guilty of those crimes can range from fines to a year in jail.
In all, South Carolina has more than 400 magistrate and municipal courts. Those courts also act as sources of revenue for local municipalities, bringing in over $20 million in fines and fees in 2013.
Given the seriousness of the penalties being handed down by summary courts in the state, the report said the state should be concerned by the number of constitutional violations witnessed by the ACLU and NACDL lawyers who sat in on criminal proceedings.
In some cases, the report found that defendants are charged and found guilty without a single lawyer being involved in the criminal proceeding. South Carolina does not require summary court judges to be lawyers and police officers often function as prosecutors, the report said. Add to that the low number of defense attorneys involved, the report said, and the entire criminal proceeding can be resolved without anyone with a law degree involved.
As one example, the report details the story of a woman identified as AP, who appeared in the Landrum Municipal Court in 2015 to answer for a charge of possession of drug paraphernalia.
“Without an attorney, AP pled guilty to the charge, while also providing an explanation to the judge that, if true, would have in fact made her innocent of the allegations,” the report stated. “The judge made clear during sentencing that he did not believe her story and asked AP if she had $620 with her to pay the fine. AP said she did not, but had just started a job at a fast food restaurant. The judge scoffed and said she would not be able to pay with that job and sentenced her to 30 days.”
The lack of attorneys also has a direct impact on things like bond proceedings, the report said. Lawyers who observed bond hearings in summary courts saw many defendants held on cash or surety bonds for low-level offenses, with no reason given for why the defendant was considered a flight risk.
Colette Tvedt, NACDL’s public defense training and reform director, said she was shocked to find how few lawyers were involved in summary court cases.
“We saw just how many poor, often black, individuals were pleading guilty to charges carrying serious consequences for them and their family without any representation at all,” Tvedt said. “People are just shuffled through the system without any understanding of just how much impact the criminal proceedings may have on their lives. It’s devastating from a constitutional standpoint.”
The report does not make any specific recommendations on how to address the issues found by its authors. Tvedt said the ACLU and the NACDL are working on a follow-up report that will be more data driven and will include specific recommendations. She said that report is expected to be completed by September.
However,Tvedt noted that the state spends far more on funding local prosecutors than it does on public defenders. The report said South Carolina counties spend about $46 million on prosecution versus $16 million in public defense funding.
Rock Hill criminal defense attorney Chris Wellborn, who often represents clients in summary court, said another problem he has witnessed is that few of the proceedings are recorded, which can create problems on appeal. Without a record of what occurred below, Wellborn said the state’s appellate courts have little to go on to determine whether the underlying proceeding was fair.
“How can the Court of Appeals know that the defendant was told they had a right to an attorney or that any evidence was actually presented to show the defendant was actually guilty?” Wellborn said. “It’s a real problem, and there seems to be little movement to fix it.”
Judge Phillip Newsom, who serves as president of the South Carolina Summary Court Judges Association, did not return calls seeking comment.
Follow Jeff Jeffrey on Twitter at @SCLWJeffrey.