Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1/25/1988
State v. Pipkin
Citations
- 364 S.E.2d 464
- 294 S.C. 336
- 1988 S.C. LEXIS 8
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- applying an analysis similar to that relied on in Pena to reverse a conviction under circumstances virtually indistinguishable from those in Cunningham’s case
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Trial, Pipkin Moved to Suppress Evidence of Both the Breathalyzer and Blood Test Results on the Ground That the Implied Consent Statute Had Been Violated. His Motion Was Denied and the Evidence Introduced at Trial
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
5 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. WickenhauserSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1992-10-26· cited 8×
- State v. WilsonSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1988-08-01· cited 6×
- State v. KnightonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1999-01-04· cited 5×
- Cunningham v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska· 1989-02-10· cited 2×
- State v. SmithCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1996-01-08· cited 2×
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.