State v. Henderson

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that in criminal appeals from magistrate or municipal court, the circuit court does not conduct a de novo review, but instead reviews for preserved error raised to it by appropriate exception
• “In criminal appeals from magistrate or municipal court, the circuit court does not conduct a de novo review, but instead reviews for preserved error raised to it by appropriate exception.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Landis
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 2004-12-06· cited 61×
• State v. Bailey
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 2006-01-23· cited 33×
• City of Aiken v. David Michael Koontz
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 2006-03-20· cited 14×
• City of Landrum v. Sarratt
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 2002-11-18· cited 14×
• State v. Taylor
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 2014-12-23· cited 14×
• State v. Gordon
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 2014-04-23· cited 4×
• State v. Williams
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 2016-05-25· cited 4×
• State v. Johnson
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 2012-01-04
• State v. Dial
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 2020-01-29
• Richland County v. Simpkins
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 2002-03-04

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Cutter
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1973-06-18· cited 33×
• State v. Hamilton
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 1997-06-16· cited 26×
• State v. Sweet
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 2000-07-31· cited 11×
• State v. Head
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 1997-12-19· cited 10×
• City of Columbia v. Wilson
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 1996-10-14· cited 4×
• City of Columbia v. Felder
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1979-11-14· cited 3×