State v. Priester

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding the trial court erred in allowing a lab technologist, who admitted “he had no training whatsoever in determining the effect of alcohol upon the human system” to testify regarding the effects of drugs and alcohol
• chain sufficient where each person who handled blood samples, testified

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Smith
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1997-03-10· cited 16×
• State v. Martin
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 2011-02-03· cited 13×
• State v. Wells
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 1992-12-29· cited 7×
• State v. Smith
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 1996-01-08· cited 2×
• Kranchick v. State
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 2016-10-26

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Williams
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1989-01-16· cited 27×
• Groth v. DeGrandchamp
  Michigan Court of Appeals· 1976-09-28· cited 20×
• State v. Carrigan
  Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 1985-03-12· cited 19×
• State v. Kahan
  Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1977-03-15· cited 19×
• Tarrock v. City of Kingston
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1951-11-14· cited 3×