Criminal Practice – Homicide by Child Abuse – Evidence – Sticks with Protruding Staples – Harmless Error – Photos of Child

South Carolina Lawyers Weekly > Opinion Digest > Criminal Practice > Criminal Practice – Homicide by Child Abuse – Evidence – Sticks with Protruding Staples – Harmless Error – Photos of Child

Criminal Practice – Homicide by Child Abuse – Evidence – Sticks with Protruding Staples – Harmless Error – Photos of Child

By S.C. Lawyers Weekly staff
Published: June 20, 2012
Time posted: 1:58 pm
Tags: Criminal Practice, Evidence, Harmless Error, Homicide by Child Abuse, Photos of Child, Sticks with Protruding Staples

State v. Salley The trial court abused its discretion in admitting into evidence sticks (with staples protruding from them) which were seized from a trashcan outside defendant’s home, when those sticks were only submitted to show the type of instrument that could have caused the child-victim’s injuries.

Login required


You have clicked on a link to information that is exclusive to SC Lawyers Weekly subscribers.

	Email Address: Password:	Already a paid subscriber but not registered for online access yet? For instructions on how to get premium web access, click here. Forgot Password?

Interested in Subscribing?

Start by choosing how you'd like your news delivered.

- Print and Digital -

- Digital Only -

Try South Carolina Lawyers Weekly for a month
for only $32 AND get a free whitepaper:

Exit strategy: a solo and
small-firm lawyer's guide to
the how and when of retirement

Click here to subscribe now.

< Previous Article
Next Article >

POST A COMMENT

Comments are closed.

Recent Opinion Digests

Contract – Quantum Meruit – Construction – Electrical Work – Personal Benefit

Boykin Contracting, Inc. v. Kirby Even though the defendant-promoter, Wayne Kirby, did not sign the lease on the bingo space until after the plaintiff-contractor’s work was completed, Kirby was listed as the “owner” on the building permit application, which was issued before the contractor started work, and as the “owner” on the certificate of occupancy, which was issued after the contractor completed its work. Furthermore, Kirby was the point person for all the work. Kirby personally benefited from the contractor’s work.

Criminal Practice – Aiding & Abetting – Homicide by Child Abuse – Insufficient Evidence

State v. Lewis Even though defendant and his co-defendant implicated each other, each testified that the other acted alone, and the state presented no evidence that they acted together.

Tort/Negligence – Unjust Enrichment – Unfair Trade Practices – Gambling Losses – Video Poker – In Pari Delicto – Defense Abrogated

Proctor v. Whitlark & Whitlark Based on statutes originally adopted as part of the Statutes of Anne, and an S.C. Supreme Court decision from a time when video poker gambling was legal, the court rules that the defense of in pari delicto has been abrogated with regard to losses sustained through illegal gambling.

Criminal Practice – PCR – Constitutional – Attorneys — Ineffective Assistance – No Prejudice – Armed Robbery – Identification – Alibi Instruction

Gibbs v. State Even though the show-up identification procedures used by the police were unduly suggestive and trial counsel was ineffective in failing to contemporaneously object, the two witnesses in question had previously identified petitioner as the robber from a photographic line-up; therefore, the subsequent show-up may be characterized as merely confirmatory and thus reliable, despite the suggestive procedure.

Municipal – Real Property – Subdivision Approval Process – Constitutional – Equal Protection

Town of Hollywood v. Floyd Where the defendant-developers wanted to put a subdivision on a dangerous curve on a narrow road, the plaintiff-town did not violate the developers’ equal protection rights when the town required the developers to conduct a traffic study. The developers failed to point to any similarly situated developments that received different treatment: Stono Plantation was approved long before the town adopted its ordinances; Wide Awake Park is a public park rather than a subdivision, was already developed when the town acquired it, and required consolidation rather than subdivision of lots; and Holly Grove is a low-income, “planned development” subject to a different approval process than residential subdivisions.