ORDERS:
FINAL ORDER AND DECISION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This matter is before the Administrative Law Judge Division upon Respondent's request for a contested case hearing pursuant to S.C.
Code Ann. § 61-2-260 (Supp. 1999). The South Carolina Department of Revenue ("DOR") seeks a $400 monetary penalty against
Respondent Albert Beach, Sr., d/b/a The Long Branch, for possessing bottles of liquor at The Long Branch, 20 Long Branch Road,
Georgetown, South Carolina, in violation of S.C. Code Ann. § 61-4-580(6) (Supp. 1999). Respondent does not contest possessing the
liquor at the location, but offers mitigating circumstances to be considered when assessing the penalty.
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. All parties were given notice of the date, time and place of the hearing.
2. Respondent, Albert Beach, Sr. is the owner of The Long Branch, 20 Long Branch Road, Georgetown, South Carolina.
3. This is Respondent's first violation in the past three years.
4. On January 6, 2000, during an inspection of The Long Branch, South Carolina Law Enforcement ("SLED") agents located two
bottles of liquor on the premises. The premises is licensed for beer and wine only.
5. Respondent does not dispute that he kept the two bottles of liquor on the premises.
6. The Long Branch was closed to the public between January 1, 2000, and January 6, 2000, which included the duration of time Mr.
Beach stored the bottles of liquor on the premises, and was closed during the inspection by SLED agents.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Based upon the Findings of Fact, I conclude as a matter of law the following:
1. The Administrative Law Judge Division has jurisdiction in this case pursuant to S.C. Code Ann.§ 1-23-600 (Supp. 1999); S.C.
Code Ann.§ 61-2-260 (Supp. 1999); and S.C. Code Ann. §§ 1-23-310, et seq. (1986 & Supp. 1999).
2. S.C. Code Ann. § 61-4-580(6) (Supp. 1999) prohibits a permittee licensed to sell beer and wine from possessing alcoholic liquors
on the licensed premises.
3. South Carolina Department of Revenue Procedure 95-7 outlines the suggested penalties for violations of the Alcohol Beverage
Licensing Statutes, and sets forth a penalty in the amount of $400 for a licensee's first violation of a statute.
4. For violations of S.C. Code Ann. § 61-4-580(6) and for a violation of any regulation pertaining to beer or wine, the Department
may, in its discretion, impose a monetary penalty upon the holder of a beer or wine permit in lieu of a suspension or revocation. S.C.
Code Ann.§ 61-4-250 (Supp. 1999).
5. S.C. Code Ann.§ 61-4-250 (Supp. 1999) authorizes the imposition of a monetary penalty of not less than twenty-five ($25) dollars
and not more than one thousand ($1,000) dollars.
6. Where the General Assembly authorizes a range of alternatives for an administratively imposed penalty, the administrative
adjudicator sitting as the fact-finder may set the amount of the penalty after a hearing on the dispute. Walker v. South Carolina ABC
Comm'n, 305 S.C. 209, 407 S.E.2d 633 (1991).
7. Considering that there were no customers on the premises and the location was closed to the public during the time Mr. Beach
stored the liquor on the premises, I find that a fine in the amount of Two Hundred ($200) Dollars is appropriate in this case.
ORDER
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Respondent, Albert Beach, Sr., d/b/a The Long Branch, shall pay a fine in the amount of Two
Hundred ($200) Dollars to the South Carolina Department of Revenue for violating S.C. Code Ann. 61-4-580(6) (Supp. 1999).
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
_____________________________
C. DUKES SCOTT
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
August 18, 2000
Columbia, South Carolina |
