S0747 creates a new section of South Carolina law establishing graduated criminal penalties for repeat trespassing offenses. It applies to second offenses and to third or subsequent offenses under several existing trespass-related statutes, including provisions governing entry after notice, entry on enclosed lands, and other trespass offenses listed in the bill. For a second offense, the bill makes the conduct a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $750, imprisonment for up to 60 days, or both. For a third or later offense within five years of a prior conviction, the penalty increases to a fine of up to $1,000, imprisonment for up to 90 days, or both.
The bill also specifies that these offenses remain triable in magistrates court, notwithstanding existing jurisdictional statutes. It defines a prior conviction for purposes of the graduated penalty scheme as a conviction within five years of the current offense. The bill includes a standard savings clause preserving pending actions and liabilities under existing law and would take effect upon approval by the Governor.
Impact
If enacted, S0747 would add a new penalty provision to Title 16 of the South Carolina Code and increase the consequences for repeat trespass offenders without changing the underlying trespass offenses themselves. It would affect individuals charged under the listed trespass statutes by creating enhanced misdemeanor penalties for repeat conduct and would direct those cases to magistrates court. The bill would also interact with existing criminal procedure and jurisdiction statutes by expressly overriding them for these offenses.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no documented debate or vote history to indicate support or opposition. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to be a law-and-order style proposal aimed at deterring repeat trespassing through escalating penalties. The caption and structure suggest a straightforward enforcement-oriented bill rather than a controversial policy overhaul.
Contention
The main policy issue likely concerns whether increasing fines and jail exposure for repeat trespassing is an appropriate deterrent or an overly punitive response, especially for low-level property offenses. Potential points of contention could include the five-year lookback period for prior convictions, the decision to keep cases in magistrates court, and whether the bill could disproportionately affect people with repeated property-related or access-related offenses. No specific objections or supporters are identified in the available materials.