State v. Bolin

How courts have described this case

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

• interpreting an identical savings clause to indicate prospective application of an act's provisions
• “By stating that the Act is to have no effect on pending actions, criminal prosecutions, rights, duties, or liabilities, and that all laws repealed or amended by the Act must be treated as remaining in full force and effect, the clear language of the Act indicates that it is prospective.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Isaac
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 2013-08-21· cited 16×
• State v. Hilton
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 2013-10-30· cited 2×

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Hodges v. Rainey
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 2000-06-12· cited 371×
• State v. Pittman
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 2007-06-11· cited 186×
• State v. Davis
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1992-10-05· cited 64×
• State v. Gaines
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 2008-10-06· cited 61×
• Brightman v. State
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1999-08-23· cited 56×
• Jenkins v. Meares
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1990-07-23· cited 27×
• State v. Varner
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1992-11-09· cited 13×
• State v. Dickey
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 2008-10-29· cited 10×