ORDERS:
ORDER AND DECISION
This matter comes before me pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. §61-1-55 (Supp. 1994) and S.C.
Code Ann. §§ 1-23-310, et seq. (Rev. 1986 and Supp. 1994) upon the application of Edward Snow
for an on-premise beer and wine permit and a restaurant minibottle license for Finish Line Lounge
located in West Columbia, South Carolina. After notice to the parties, a hearing was conducted on
November 29, 1995.
At the hearing, the Department stipulated that the location was a suitable one for the sale of
beer and wine and that the location met the requirements for the issuance of a restaurant sale and
consumption license. The Department and Chief A. G. Dantzler of the Cayce Police Department
protested the application because of the criminal record of the applicant.
The sole issue presented at the hearing was the moral character of the applicant. Based upon
the evidence presented, the applicant is not a person of good moral character and the application is
denied.
FINDINGS OF FACT
I make the following findings of fact, taking into consideration the burden on the parties to
establish their respective cases by a preponderance of the evidence, and taking into account the
credibility of the witnesses:
1. In October 1987, the applicant, Edward E. Snow, was convicted of possession with
the intent to distribute methamphetamine, a violation of S.C. Code Ann. § 44-53-370.
2. He was sentenced to three years imprisonment, which he served and was released.
3. On December 4, 1990 he was pardoned for the offense.
4. Other than a driving under the influence conviction in 1991, Mr. Snow has not had
any further criminal convictions or arrests and no involvement with illegal drugs.
5. Mr. Snow has applied for an on-premises beer and wine permit and a sale and
consumption license for a restaurant, Finish Line Lounge, in West Columbia, South Carolina.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Based upon the findings of fact, I make the following conclusions of law:
1. The Administrative Law Judge is vested with the powers, duties and responsibilities
exercised by the former Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission and hearing officers pursuant to
Chapter 23 of Title 1. S.C. Code Ann. § 61-1-55 (Supp. 1995).
2. S.C. Code Ann. § 61-9-320 (Supp. 1995) provides the statutory requirements for the
issuance of beer and wine permits. It provides in part that the applicant must be of good moral
character.
3. There is no single criterion or standard for determining the meaning of the term "good
moral character" and the licensing authority must judge whether the acts and conduct shown are
sufficient in themselves or as an index to character to disqualify an applicant. 1969 Atty. Gen. Op.
2709 at 160; 48 C.J.S. Intoxicating Liquors § 105 at 470 (1981). A liquor license may be refused
a person who has been convicted of a crime or crimes, particularly a violation of the liquor laws.
Wall v. S.C. ABC Commission, 269 S.C. 13, 235 S.E.2d 806 (1977). A license may be refused to
a person who has been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude. 48 C.J.S. Intoxicating
Liquors § 105 at 471.
4. Possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute is a crime of moral
turpitude. Porter v. State, 290 S.C. 38, 348 S.E.2d 172 (1986) (conviction for the sale of 3, 4-methylenedioxy amphetamine). "Moral turpitude" is anything done contrary to justice, honesty,
principle, or good morals and includes criminal acts which involve intentional dishonesty for purpose
of personal gain. See State v. Morris, 289 S.C. 294, 345 S.E.2d 477 (1986).
5. If good character is a necessary qualification for seeking some position, a pardoned
individual is not automatically qualified as a result of receiving a pardon. See 1991 Op. Atty. Gen.
16 at 155 (December 16, 1991). Moral character of the applicant, and not simply the existence of
certain convictions, is the overriding concern expressed in the statute. The pardon in question does
not alter the fact that the underlying acts resulting in the criminal record were committed. An
individual must be evaluated on the basis of his moral character, when good moral character is a
requirement, irrespective of the fact that he was subsequently pardoned. Id.
7. Mr. Snow was also convicted of driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol. This
conviction coupled with the conviction of possession with intent to distribute illegal drugs raises
serious questions about the applicant's moral character to administer the laws of the State relating to
the sale of alcoholic liquors, beer and wine particularly in a lounge and bar setting such as the
proposed business. Mr. Snow has not overcome the challenges to his character.
ORDER
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is
ORDERED, that the application of Edward E. Snow for the Finish Line Lounge in West
Columbia, is DENIED.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
_____________________________
ALISON RENEE LEE
Administrative Law Judge
January _____, 1996
Columbia, South Carolina |
