SOUTH CAROLINA DUI LAWYER

Most criminal cases start with a triggering event: a traffic stop, a call for service, a complaint from another person, or an officer’s observation. From that first moment, the State is building a narrative: what they claim happened, why they got involved, and whether they had a lawful basis to take the next steps.

A good defense begins by testing that foundation. We look closely at whether law enforcement had legal justification to stop or detain you, whether the encounter was prolonged without cause, and whether the facts described in reports match what actually occurred. If the initial contact is weak or unlawful, it can affect everything that follows.

Statements are often the State’s most powerful evidence, because they’re hard to “explain away” once they exist. That includes not only formal interviews, but also casual remarks made during a stop, on body camera, to a dispatcher, or even to third parties. People frequently talk because they’re nervous, trying to be polite, or hoping to clear things up.

We evaluate how statements were obtained and whether they’re reliable and admissible. We look for leading questions, pressure tactics, misunderstandings, and gaps in recording. We also consider whether you were properly advised of your rights when required. In many cases, limiting or challenging statements can significantly reduce the State’s leverage.

When the State relies on physical evidence: items found on your person, in your car, in your home, or on a phone, the case often rises and falls on the legality of the search and the reliability of how evidence was collected.

We examine whether law enforcement had lawful authority for the search (warrant, consent, a recognized exception, or probable cause), and whether the search stayed within legal boundaries. We also scrutinize chain of custody and evidence handling, because missing documentation, contamination, or sloppy procedures can create reasonable doubt or support suppression of key evidence.

Many cases depend on “paper evidence”: lab results, test records, officer reports, incident narratives, calibration logs, medical records, and other documentation. The State often treats these as neutral facts, but records can be incomplete, inconsistent, or based on assumptions.

We review reports for internal contradictions, missing steps, and unsupported conclusions. For testing and lab-driven evidence, we look at procedures, timing, documentation, and whether the State can prove reliability. In practice, careful review of records often reveals issues the State did not anticipate, and those issues can change the leverage in a case.

Video and witnesses can either strengthen the State’s case or expose its weaknesses. Dash cam, body cam, surveillance footage, and 911 audio often become the “truth” in a courtroom, even when the State’s written report tells a different story. Witness testimony can be powerful too, but it can also be unreliable due to stress, bias, intoxication, poor vantage point, or faulty memory.

We move quickly to identify and preserve relevant recordings and witness information. We compare video and audio to the reports, evaluate what the recordings do and do not show, and assess witness credibility and consistency. When video is missing, incomplete, or delayed, we also examine why, and whether that gap affects the fairness and reliability of the prosecution.