However, a deeper look reveals that the summary court judge has an incredible amount of influence over the overall likelihood that arrests end up as DUI convictions in their court. Specifically, how a judge has ruled in the past over issues like whether a dash cam video is sufficient can have everything to do with how prosecutors will handle cases in that courtroom going forward. While undoubtedly judges are dealing with the hand they are dealt with a long and complex set of statutes, they can still play a role in ensuring that DUIs will be dealt with seriously. This can be through the statements they make and penalties they issue reflecting the danger of drunk and drugged driving. It also can be through how they deal with pre-trial motions by the defense. It was relayed to us that General Sessions judges typically show much less patience in dealing with a barrage of pre-trial motions over technicalities. In addition, officers in some parts of the state have relayed to MADD that their judges do not throw out dash cam videos over meaningless flaws in the video. In addition, judges can also decide how much they allow continuances by the defense. In every expert panel we hold, some version of the comment is made that “delay is the first tactic in DUI defense.” As discussed in our section on case delays above, there are many reasons why continuances may be requested and some are very legitimate. Regardless, the judge can influence the speed with which DUI cases are heard. While we most often heard stories of repeated delays always granted by the judge, we also heard stories of judges taking control of the situation and demanding a defense attorney make themself present at the next available opportunity. It is also very important that judges seek out additional training on overseeing DUI cases. New judges go through three hours of training on DUI cases—half presented from a prosecutor and half from a defense attorney. Additional training is available but not always utilized. Given the complexity of the cases, especially drugged driving cases, it seems that this level of training is insufficient. It should also be noted that South Carolina magistrates are not required to have any legal background to be appointed to that role. It is encouraging that South Carolina has recently funded and filled the position of Judicial Outreach Liaison. He is an active judge experienced on DUI cases and will be tasked with increasing training and assistance to other judges on this topic. Finally, we raise an issue brought up in more than one of our local roundtable discussions regarding how judges handle pro se (defendant representing themselves) cases. While it is essential that the legal system, including judges, protect the rights of pro se defendants, there were descriptions of practices that seemed to us and others to reach beyond the line of what is appropriate. Specifically, we heard of some judges that simply refuse to accept guilty pleas, even when the pro se defendant has repeatedly indicated they understand their actions and are declining representation. In some other instances, there were reports of judges acting as the defendant’s attorney, telling them what they should do in terms of a defense strategy. We believe the system works best
29
Made with FlippingBook Learn more on our blog