Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 11/21/2005

State v. King

Citations

623 S.E.2d 865
367 S.C. 131
2005 S.C. App. LEXIS 254

How courts have described this case

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

holding, where the trial court abused its discretion in not allowing a witness to testify, the error was “coupled with prejudice as a matter of law”
\An abuse of discretion occurs when the decision by the [plea court] is based on an error of law.\
\An abuse of discretion occurs when the decision by the [sentencing court] is based on an error of law.\
\The reason for the rule requiring a proffer of excluded evidence is to enable the reviewing court to discern prejudice.\
“Courts presume a witness to be competent because bias or other defects in a witness’s testimony-revealed primarily through cross-examination-affect a witness’s credibility and may be weighed by the finder of fact.”
\A court's ruling on the admissibility of evidence will not be reversed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion or the commission of legal error which results in prejudice to the defendant.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Anderson, Goolsby, Short

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

20 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.