April 7, 1987
Subject:
Motor Vehicles; South Carolina Bond Forfeitures
Requested By:
William S. Hiatt Commissioner of Motor Vehicles
Question:
Is the Division of Motor Vehicles prohibited from taking action against a North Carolina licensee upon receipt of a "conviction" by bond forfeiture from South Carolina?
Conclusion:
No.
The current policy of the Division of Motor Vehicles when it receives notice of a bond forfeiture on a traffic violation occurring in South Carolina by a North Carolina licensee is to record the offense under G.S. 20-24(c) and G.S. 20-26(a), but disregard invoking sanctions under G.S. 2016(a)(7). This policy remains as a result of two court decisions more than 20 years old: In re Wright, 228 NC 584, 46 SE 2d 696 (1948) and In re Donnelly, 260 NC 375, 132 SE 2d 904 (1963). Our Supreme Court ruled in both cases that since the North Carolina defendant was not served with a warrant, no legal action was pending from which a valid judgment of forfeiture could issue. At that time, the only recognized criminal process available in order to charge a misdemeanor in North and South Carolina was a warrant. South Carolina in 1962 amended its statutes to provide that uniform traffic tickets shall vest all traffic courts with jurisdiction to hear and dispose of traffic cases. S.C. Code 1962, Sec. 56-7-10. Since the enactment of G.S. 15A-302 in 1973, North Carolina has recognized a citation as valid criminal process in order to charge a traffic offense as well. Consequently, since the changes in both states’ statutes now recognize traffic citations as valid criminal process in order to charge violations of the motor vehicle laws, the basis for the holding in Wright and Donnelly has been removed and action under G.S. 2016(a)(7) would be permissible upon receipt of a notice of bond forfeiture from the South Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles.
LACY H. THORNBURG Attorney General
Jane P. Gray Special Deputy Attorney General