Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 7/9/1996

State v. Jenkins

Citations

474 S.E.2d 812
322 S.C. 360

How courts have described this case

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

\The reason for the rule requiring a proffer of excluded evidence is to enable the reviewing court to discern prejudice.\
\The reason for the rule requiring a proffer of excluded evidence is to enable the reviewing court to discern prejudice.\
\The reason for the rule requiring a proffer of excluded evidence is to enable the reviewing court to discern prejudice.\
\The reason for the rule requiring a proffer of excluded evidence is to enable the reviewing court to discern prejudice.\
\[T]rial [courts] may impose reasonable limits on such cross-examination based on concerns about . . . interrogation that is repetitive or only marginally relevant.\
where judge ruled defendant could not cross-examine police officer about the confidential informant where informant was “linchpin” in the State’s case, defendant’s right of confrontation was violated

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hearn, Connor, Goolsby

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

15 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.