Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1/12/2009

State v. Douglas

Citations

671 S.E.2d 606
380 S.C. 499
2009 S.C. LEXIS 4

How courts have described this case

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

holding that the witness was improperly qualified as a forensic interviewing expert where the nature of her testimony was based on personal observations and discussions with the child victim
holding that the witness was improperly qualified as a forensic interviewing expert where the nature of her testimony was based on personal observations and discussions with the child victim
holding that trial court’s admission of testimony from a forensic interviewer did not prejudice defendant as interviewer testified as to her personal observations and did not vouch for the victim’s veracity
holding a forensic interviewer’s personal observations of alleged victims did not require specialized knowledge, and therefore, qualification as an expert was unnecessary
concluding a forensic interviewer did not vouch for the victim’s veracity where she never stated she believed the victim and gave no other indication concerning the victim’s veracity
concluding a witness did not vouch for the victim's veracity because the witness never stated she believed the victim and gave no other indication concerning the victim's veracity

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Waller, Toal, Beatty, Kittredge, Pleicones

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

26 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.