South Carolina              
Administrative Law Court
Edgar A. Brown building 1205 Pendleton St., Suite 224 Columbia, SC 29201 Voice: (803) 734-0550

SC Administrative Law Court Decisions

CAPTION:
SCDOR vs. Sara B. Juel, d/b/a Waterfront Grill and Tavern

AGENCY:
South Carolina Department of Revenue

PARTIES:
Petitioners:
South Carolina Department of Revenue

Respondents:
Sara B. Juel, d/b/a Waterfront Grill and Tavern
 
DOCKET NUMBER:
94-ALJ-17-0100-CC

APPEARANCES:
Nicholas P. Sipe, Attorney for Petitioner

James H. Harrison, Attorney for Respondent
 

ORDERS:

ORDER AND DECISION

This matter comes before me pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 61-1-55 (Supp 1993) amended by S.C. Code Ann. § 61-1-55 (Supp. 1994); and S.C. Code Ann §§ 1-23-310, et seq.(Rev. 1986 & Supp. 1994) upon request for a hearing by Respondent after being cited for alleged administrative violations against the sale and consumption license and beer and wine permit of Respondent occurring on or about January 16, 1994. The South Carolina Department ofRevenue and Taxation (hereinafter referred to as "DOR") seeks revocation of Respondent's license and permit for the alleged violations. A hearing was held on August 30, 1994.

I find that Respondent violated S.C. Code Ann. § 61-9-410(5) (Supp. 1994) by permitting a criminal act upon the licensed premises (simple possession of marijuana). I find that Respondent violated S.C. Code Ann. § 61-5-20(4) (Supp. 1994) by permitting consumption of liquor during restricted hours. I also find that Respondent did not commit a violation of 23 S.C. Code Ann. Regs. 7-82 (1976) (hindering an inspection of the licensed premises). Respondent's minibottle license and beer and wine permit are hereby suspended for fifteen (15) days and a fine of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000) is imposed.





FINDINGS OF FACT

By a preponderance of the evidence, I find:

(1) Respondent holds a sale and consumption liquor license and on-premises beer and wine permit at a location in Little River, South Carolina, at a restaurant and lounge known as the Waterfront Grill and Tavern.

(2) Notice of the time, date, place, and subject matter of the hearing was given to the Respondent and DOR.

(3) On or about January 16, 1994, the establishment closed for business at 12:00 midnight and the doors were locked.

(4) On or about January 16, 1994, between 12:15 a.m. and 12:25 a.m. Sunday, SLED Special Agent Stacey Snow and officers of the Horry County Police Department approached the front entrance of the Waterfront Grill and Tavern in Little River, South Carolina.

(5) The officers observed six persons through the glass door and window sitting at the bar.

(6) Present in the establishment were Respondent Sara S. Juel, John Juel, Roger Wade, Deborah Wade, Michael Gosslin, and Cheri Tysinger.

(7) The Juels, Gosslin, and Tysinger were employees. Mr. Wade was a friend helping

in the after-work clean-up of the establishment. Mrs. Wade had come to the establishment to pick up her husband.

(8) Agent Snow knocked on the front door and announced three times, "State Police. Open the door."

(9) Approximately 35 seconds after the first knock, two persons at the bar got up and moved away from the bar; one person moved to kitchen area; one person went to the back door.

(10) Approximately 45 seconds after the first knock, John Juel, Respondent's husband, unlocked the front door and allowed the officers to enter the location.

(11) During the above 45-second period of time, all six persons in the tavern remained in Agent Snow's line of vision.

(12) Upon entering the establishment, officers noticed the smell of marijuana.



(13) A search was conducted, resulting in the confiscation of a roach clip of marijuana from the bar and two bags of marijuana. One bag of marijuana was taken from Mr. Wade's person, and one bag of marijuana was taken from Mrs. Wade's person.

(14) Mr. and Mrs. Wade subsequently were convicted of simple possession of marijuana in Horry County Magistrate Court, each paying a $275 fine.

(15) Respondent knew or should have known that marijuana was being smoked on the business premises.

(16) On or about January 16, 1994, between 12:15 a.m. and 12:25 a.m. Sunday, when the officers entered the establishment, three or more open cups containing mixed alcoholic beverages were on the bar.

(17) Respondent has no previous violations of alcoholic beverage laws.

(18) Respondent and her husband have owned and operated the licensed location since approximately 1991.

(19) Petitioner seeks revocation of Respondent's sale and consumption license and beer and wine permit.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, I conclude, as a matter of law, the following:

(1) Pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 61-1-55 (Supp. 1993) and Chapter 23 of Title I of the 1976 Code, as amended, the South Carolina Administrative Law Judge Division has jurisdiction in this matter.

(2) Respondent violated S.C. Code Ann. § 61-5-20(4) (Supp. 1994) by permitting consumption of liquor on the licensed premises during restricted hours on or about January 16, 1994.

(3) Respondent violated S.C. Code Ann. § 61-9-410(5) (Supp. 1994), by allowing the commission of a criminal act in allowing the simple possession of marijuana by a person on the licensed premises on or about January 16, 1994.

(4) Respondent did not hinder or delay the inspection of the licensed premises by a peace officer in violation of 23 S.C. Code Ann. Regs. 7-82 (1976) on or about January 16, 1994.

(5) Liquor licenses are neither contracts nor property rights. They are mere permits,

issued or granted in the exercise of the State's police power and to be enjoyed so long as the restrictions and conditions governing their continuance are complied with. The tribunal authorized to grant the issuance of a license is likewise authorized, for cause, to revoke it. Feldman v. S.C. Tax Commission, 203 S.C. 49, 26 S.E. 2d 22 (1943).

(6) A violation of any regulation or Code section of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act is punishable by revocation or suspension of the license pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 61-5-60 (Supp. 1994) and/or imposition of a monetary penalty not to exceed one thousand dollars per violation pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. §§ 61-1-80 and 61-13-510 (Supp. 1994).

ORDER

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that for the violation of S.C. Code Ann. § 61-5-20(4) (Supp. 1994) Respondent's sale and consumption license and beer and wine permit are suspended for a period of fifteen (15) days. A SLED agent shall serve a copy of this Order on Respondent and take possession of the license and permit cited above. Upon service of the fifteen (15) days suspension, an agent shall return the permit and license to Respondent. During the period of suspension, Respondent is ordered to post a copy of this order at a visible location at the licensed premises, and to cease and desist all sales of beer, wine, or minibottles, pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 61-5-110(3) (Supp. 1994).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that for the violation of S.C. Code Ann.

§ 61-9-410(5) (Supp. 1994) Respondent shall pay a fine in the amount of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000). Failure of Respondent to pay the fine assessed in full within fifteen (15) days of service of this Order shall result in automatic revocation of Respondent's sale and consumption liquor license and on-premises beer and wine permit.

______________________________________

STEPHEN P. BATES

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE

April ____, 1995

Columbia, South Carolina


Brown Bldg.

 

 

 

 

 

Copyright © 2024 South Carolina Administrative Law Court