State v. Lee

How courts have described this case

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

• ‘‘[r]equiring a higher burden of proof in proving improper motives on the part of the prosecution would put an almost impossible burden on defendants to maintain a . . . due process claim in [preindictment] delay cases’’
• \[T]he second part of the due process inquiry requires the court to consider the prosecution's reasons for the delay and balance the justification for delay with any prejudice to the defendant.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State Ex Rel. Knotts v. Facemire
  West Virginia Supreme Court· 2009-06-05· cited 31×
• State v. McFarland
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2025-09-02· cited 1×
• State v. McFarland (Third Concurrence)
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2025-09-02
• State v. Sanderson
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 2026-06-02

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• United States v. Marion
  Supreme Court· 1971-12-20· cited 3,756×
• United States v. Lovasco
  Supreme Court· 1977-10-03· cited 2,170×
• Benjamin Henderson Jones v. Ronald J. Angelone, Director, Department of Corrections of the Commonwealth of Virginia
  Fourth Circuit· 1996-09-03· cited 113×
• United States v. Automated Medical Laboratories, Inc.
  Fourth Circuit· 1985-08-15· cited 98×
• Wilton Howell v. W.R. Barker Attorney General of the State of North Carolina
  Fourth Circuit· 1990-05-24· cited 83×
• State v. Brazell
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1997-01-13· cited 63×
• State v. Lee
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 2004-08-23· cited 5×