Skip to main content

State v. Salisbury

Citations

  • 498 S.E.2d 655
  • 330 S.C. 250
  • 1998 S.C. App. LEXIS 19

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding any alleged error in sentencing is not jurisdictional; therefore, a contemporaneous objection is required to preserve the issue for appellate review
  • ruling the conflict in testimony regarding the administration of the breathalyzer test went to the weight of the evidence as opposed to its admissibility
  • holding the denial of a motion to suppress evidence based on a Rule 5 violation is within the discretion of the trial judge and will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion
  • \[A]ny alleged error in sentencing . . . requires a contemporaneous objection to preserve the issue for appellate review.\
  • \[A]ny alleged error in sentencing . . . requires a contemporaneous objection to preserve the issue for appellate review.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Connor, Anderson, Huff

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

51 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.