Supreme Court of South Carolina· 6/22/2009
State v. Wiles
Citations
- 679 S.E.2d 172
- 383 S.C. 151
- 2009 S.C. LEXIS 156
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that a renewal to an objection to the admission of evidence made in limine is not required when there is \clearly a final ruling\
- holding that even when the evidence in dispute does not immediately follow the motion in limine, the issue is preserved for appellate review if the trial court clearly indicated its ruling was final rather than preliminary
- discussing the propriety of introducing evidence of the defendant's escape from prison as res gestae evidence during his trial for assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature
- finding the defendant's argument was preserved for appeal because the trial court's pretrial ruling was final and the evidence in contention was referenced by the parties in their opening statements
- “Evidence is relevant and admissible if it tends to establish or make more or less probable the matter in controversy.”
- \Evidence is relevant and admissible if it tends to establish or make more or less probable the matter in controversy.\ (citing Rules 401 & 402, SCRE)
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Waller, Toal, Pleicones, Beatty, Kittredge
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
22 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- State v. KromahSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2013-01-23· cited 94×
- State v. RiveraSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2013-02-13· cited 23×
- State v. AtiehCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2012-04-25· cited 21×
- State v. GilmoreCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2011-11-02· cited 20×
- State v. GarrisCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2011-08-10· cited 18×
- State v. SpearsCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2013-04-17· cited 18×
- State v. McGeeCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2014-04-30· cited 12×
- State v. SmithCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2011-01-26· cited 8×
- In the Matter of the Care and Treatment of CampbellSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2019-06-26· cited 8×
- State v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2017-06-14· cited 7×
- State v. WashingtonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2018-08-08· cited 7×
- State v. BratschiCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2015-07-15· cited 7×
- State v. ChisholmCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2011-10-26· cited 6×
- State v. PattersonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2019-01-04· cited 6×
- State v. KotowskiCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2019-05-15· cited 3×
- State v. SledgeCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2019-08-07
- State v. HeathCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2021-06-02
- State v. JonesSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2021-12-08
- State v. Gabrielle Oliva Lashane Davis KocsisCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2022-05-04
- State v. TynesCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2013-04-03
Cites
8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Staubes v. City of Folly BeachSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2000-03-20· cited 172×
- State v. AdamsSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1996-04-29· cited 113×
- State v. ForresterSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2001-02-12· cited 111×
- State v. StokesSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2009-02-17· cited 61×
- State v. BeckSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2000-08-21· cited 56×
- State v. MuellerCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1995-07-17· cited 42×
- State v. GreenSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1973-11-01· cited 17×
- State v. McNeilCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1994-05-23· cited 7×
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.