Harris v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• deciding in PCR-action that Ex Post Facto Clause was not violated because inmate was not prejudiced by inability to earn good-time and work credits under new statute
• deciding in PCR action that Ex Post Facto Clause was not violated because inmate was not prejudiced by inability to earn good-time and work credits under new statute
• reviewing work and good behavior credits

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Al-Shabazz v. State
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 2000-02-14· cited 168×
• Simmons v. State
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1994-07-05· cited 2×

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Miller v. Florida
  Supreme Court· 1987-06-09· cited 1,316×
• Cherry v. State
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1989-12-04· cited 215×
• State v. Huiett
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1990-07-23· cited 14×
• Elmore v. State
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1991-09-23· cited 13×
• Seifert v. SOUTHERN NATIONAL BANK OF SC
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1991-10-24· cited 11×