8 South Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 2023–2026 8 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by South Carolina courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Davisgreen2 sentences2024This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Davis, 354 S.C. 348, 355 , 580 S.E.2d 778, 782 (Ct. App. 2003) (explaining that "[a] reviewing court should give great deference to a magistrate's determination of probable cause"); State v. Rodriquez, 323 S.C. 484, 490 , 476 S.E.2d 161, 165 (Ct. App. 1996) ("Generally, police seizures are per se unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment unless such seizures are accomplished pursuant t 2024This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Davis, 354 S.C. 348, 355 , 580 S.E.2d 778, 782 (Ct. App. 2003) (explaining that "[a] reviewing court should give great deference to a magistrate's determination of probable cause"); State v. Rodriquez, 323 S.C. 484, 490 , 476 S.E.2d 161, 165 (Ct. App. 1996) ("Generally, police seizures are per se unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment unless such seizures are accomplished pursuant t | 2 | 2 |
State v. Rodriquezgreen2 sentences2024This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Davis, 354 S.C. 348, 355 , 580 S.E.2d 778, 782 (Ct. App. 2003) (explaining that "[a] reviewing court should give great deference to a magistrate's determination of probable cause"); State v. Rodriquez, 323 S.C. 484, 490 , 476 S.E.2d 161, 165 (Ct. App. 1996) ("Generally, police seizures are per se unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment unless such seizures are accomplished pursuant t 2024This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Davis, 354 S.C. 348, 355 , 580 S.E.2d 778, 782 (Ct. App. 2003) (explaining that "[a] reviewing court should give great deference to a magistrate's determination of probable cause"); State v. Rodriquez, 323 S.C. 484, 490 , 476 S.E.2d 161, 165 (Ct. App. 1996) ("Generally, police seizures are per se unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment unless such seizures are accomplished pursuant t | 2 | 2 |
Curtis v. Stategreen2 sentences2023"This Court has a limited scope of review in cases involving a constitutional challenge to a statute because all statutes are presumed constitutional and, if possible, will be construed to render them valid." Curtis v. State, 345 S.C. 557, 569 , 549 S.E.2d 591, 597 (2001). 2023"This Court has a limited scope of review in cases involving a constitutional challenge to a statute because all statutes are presumed constitutional and, if possible, will be construed to render them valid." Curtis v. State, 345 S.C. 557, 569 , 549 S.E.2d 591, 597 (2001). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Vickerygreen2 sentences2026"The Fourth Amendment guarantees a person the right to be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures." State v. Vickery, 399 S.C. 507, 514-15 , 732 S.E.2d 218, 221 (Ct. App. 2012) (citing U.S. Const. amend. 2026"The Fourth Amendment guarantees a person the right to be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures." State v. Vickery, 399 S.C. 507, 514-15 , 732 S.E.2d 218, 221 (Ct. App. 2012) (citing U.S. Const. amend. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Dillgreen2 sentences2026We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Frasier, 437 S.C. 625 , 633, 879 S.E.2d 762 , 766 (2022) ("[A]ppellate review of a motion to suppress based on the Fourth Amendment involves a two-step analysis."); id. at 633-34 , 879 S.E.2d at 766 ("This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Crummey, 443 S.C. 94 , 107, 902 S.E.2d 391 , 398 (Ct. App. 2024) ("A search or seizure is reasonable under the Fourth A 2026We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Frasier, 437 S.C. 625 , 633, 879 S.E.2d 762 , 766 (2022) ("[A]ppellate review of a motion to suppress based on the Fourth Amendment involves a two-step analysis."); id. at 633-34 , 879 S.E.2d at 766 ("This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Crummey, 443 S.C. 94 , 107, 902 S.E.2d 391 , 398 (Ct. App. 2024) ("A search or seizure is reasonable under the Fourth A | 1 | 1 |
State v. Thompsongreen2 sentences2026We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Frasier, 437 S.C. 625 , 633, 879 S.E.2d 762 , 766 (2022) ("[A]ppellate review of a motion to suppress based on the Fourth Amendment involves a two-step analysis."); id. at 633-34 , 879 S.E.2d at 766 ("This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Crummey, 443 S.C. 94 , 107, 902 S.E.2d 391 , 398 (Ct. App. 2024) ("A search or seizure is reasonable under the Fourth A 2026We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: State v. Frasier, 437 S.C. 625 , 633, 879 S.E.2d 762 , 766 (2022) ("[A]ppellate review of a motion to suppress based on the Fourth Amendment involves a two-step analysis."); id. at 633-34 , 879 S.E.2d at 766 ("This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Crummey, 443 S.C. 94 , 107, 902 S.E.2d 391 , 398 (Ct. App. 2024) ("A search or seizure is reasonable under the Fourth A | 1 | 1 |
Illinois v. Gatesgreen1 sentence2024This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Davis, 354 S.C. 348, 355 , 580 S.E.2d 778, 782 (Ct. App. 2003) (explaining that "[a] reviewing court should give great deference to a magistrate's determination of probable cause"); State v. Rodriquez, 323 S.C. 484, 490 , 476 S.E.2d 161, 165 (Ct. App. 1996) ("Generally, police seizures are per se unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment unless such seizures are accomplished pursuant t | 1 | 1 |
State v. Baccusgreen2 sentences2024This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Davis, 354 S.C. 348, 355 , 580 S.E.2d 778, 782 (Ct. App. 2003) (explaining that "[a] reviewing court should give great deference to a magistrate's determination of probable cause"); State v. Rodriquez, 323 S.C. 484, 490 , 476 S.E.2d 161, 165 (Ct. App. 1996) ("Generally, police seizures are per se unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment unless such seizures are accomplished pursuant t 2024This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Davis, 354 S.C. 348, 355 , 580 S.E.2d 778, 782 (Ct. App. 2003) (explaining that "[a] reviewing court should give great deference to a magistrate's determination of probable cause"); State v. Rodriquez, 323 S.C. 484, 490 , 476 S.E.2d 161, 165 (Ct. App. 1996) ("Generally, police seizures are per se unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment unless such seizures are accomplished pursuant t | 1 | 1 |
State v. Chisholmgreen2 sentences2024Code Ann. § 17-13-140 (2014) (explaining that in South Carolina, search warrants may be issued "only upon affidavit sworn to before the magistrate . . . establishing the grounds for the warrant"); State v. Chisholm, 395 S.C. 259, 267 , 717 S.E.2d 614, 618 (Ct. App. 2011) ("Considerations for determining whether or not there exists probable cause to permit the acquisition of [DNA] evidence include the following elements: (1) probable cause to believe the suspect has committed the crime; (2) a clear indication that relevant material evidence will be found; and (3) the method used to secure it is 2024Code Ann. § 17-13-140 (2014) (explaining that in South Carolina, search warrants may be issued "only upon affidavit sworn to before the magistrate . . . establishing the grounds for the warrant"); State v. Chisholm, 395 S.C. 259, 267 , 717 S.E.2d 614, 618 (Ct. App. 2011) ("Considerations for determining whether or not there exists probable cause to permit the acquisition of [DNA] evidence include the following elements: (1) probable cause to believe the suspect has committed the crime; (2) a clear indication that relevant material evidence will be found; and (3) the method used to secure it is | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Cortezgreen1 sentence2023See State v. Frasier, 437 S.C. 625 , 633, 879 S.E.2d 762 , 766 (2022), reh'g denied (Nov. 17, 2022) ("[A]ppellate review of a motion to suppress based on the Fourth Amendment involves a two-step analysis."); id. at 633-34 , 879 S.E.2d at 766 ("This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion—in this case whether reasonable suspicion exists—is a question of law subject to de novo review."); Milledge v. State, 422 S.C. 366, 376 , 811 S.E.2d 796, 802 (2018) ("A police officer's assessment of the circumstances may i | 1 | 1 |
Milledge v. Stategreen2 sentences2023See State v. Frasier, 437 S.C. 625 , 633, 879 S.E.2d 762 , 766 (2022), reh'g denied (Nov. 17, 2022) ("[A]ppellate review of a motion to suppress based on the Fourth Amendment involves a two-step analysis."); id. at 633-34 , 879 S.E.2d at 766 ("This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion—in this case whether reasonable suspicion exists—is a question of law subject to de novo review."); Milledge v. State, 422 S.C. 366, 376 , 811 S.E.2d 796, 802 (2018) ("A police officer's assessment of the circumstances may i 2023See State v. Frasier, 437 S.C. 625 , 633, 879 S.E.2d 762 , 766 (2022), reh'g denied (Nov. 17, 2022) ("[A]ppellate review of a motion to suppress based on the Fourth Amendment involves a two-step analysis."); id. at 633-34 , 879 S.E.2d at 766 ("This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion—in this case whether reasonable suspicion exists—is a question of law subject to de novo review."); Milledge v. State, 422 S.C. 366, 376 , 811 S.E.2d 796, 802 (2018) ("A police officer's assessment of the circumstances may i | 1 | 1 |
State v. Taylorgreen2 sentences2023See State v. Frasier, 437 S.C. 625 , 633, 879 S.E.2d 762 , 766 (2022), reh'g denied (Nov. 17, 2022) ("[A]ppellate review of a motion to suppress based on the Fourth Amendment involves a two-step analysis."); id. at 633-34 , 879 S.E.2d at 766 ("This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion—in this case whether reasonable suspicion exists—is a question of law subject to de novo review."); Milledge v. State, 422 S.C. 366, 376 , 811 S.E.2d 796, 802 (2018) ("A police officer's assessment of the circumstances may i 2023See State v. Frasier, 437 S.C. 625 , 633, 879 S.E.2d 762 , 766 (2022), reh'g denied (Nov. 17, 2022) ("[A]ppellate review of a motion to suppress based on the Fourth Amendment involves a two-step analysis."); id. at 633-34 , 879 S.E.2d at 766 ("This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion—in this case whether reasonable suspicion exists—is a question of law subject to de novo review."); Milledge v. State, 422 S.C. 366, 376 , 811 S.E.2d 796, 802 (2018) ("A police officer's assessment of the circumstances may i | 1 | 1 |
State v. Provetgreen2 sentences2023See State v. Frasier, 437 S.C. 625 , 633, 879 S.E.2d 762 , 766 (2022) ("[A]ppellate review of a motion to suppress based on the Fourth Amendment involves a two-step analysis."); id. at 633-34 , 879 S.E.2d at 766 ("This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion—in this case whether reasonable suspicion exists—is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Butler, 353 S.C. 383, 389 , 577 S.E.2d 498, 501 (Ct. App. 2003) ("The stopping of a vehicle and the detention of its occupants constitutes a seiz 2023See State v. Frasier, 437 S.C. 625 , 633, 879 S.E.2d 762 , 766 (2022) ("[A]ppellate review of a motion to suppress based on the Fourth Amendment involves a two-step analysis."); id. at 633-34 , 879 S.E.2d at 766 ("This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion—in this case whether reasonable suspicion exists—is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Butler, 353 S.C. 383, 389 , 577 S.E.2d 498, 501 (Ct. App. 2003) ("The stopping of a vehicle and the detention of its occupants constitutes a seiz | 1 | 1 |
State v. Andersongreen1 sentence2023See State v. Frasier, 437 S.C. 625 , 633, 879 S.E.2d 762 , 766 (2022), reh'g denied (Nov. 17, 2022) ("[A]ppellate review of a motion to suppress based on the Fourth Amendment involves a two-step analysis."); id. at 633-34 , 879 S.E.2d at 766 ("This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion—in this case whether reasonable suspicion exists—is a question of law subject to de novo review."); Milledge v. State, 422 S.C. 366, 376 , 811 S.E.2d 796, 802 (2018) ("A police officer's assessment of the circumstances may i | 1 | 1 |
State v. Scottgreen2 sentences2023This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Davis, 354 S.C. 348, 355 , 580 S.E.2d 778, 782 (Ct. App. 2003) (explaining that a reviewing court should give great deference to a magistrate's determination of probable cause); State v. Rodriquez, 323 S.C. 484, 490 , 476 S.E.2d 161, 165 (Ct. App. 1996) ("Generally, police seizures are per se unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment unless such seizures are accomplished pursuant to ju 2023This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Davis, 354 S.C. 348, 355 , 580 S.E.2d 778, 782 (Ct. App. 2003) (explaining that a reviewing court should give great deference to a magistrate's determination of probable cause); State v. Rodriquez, 323 S.C. 484, 490 , 476 S.E.2d 161, 165 (Ct. App. 1996) ("Generally, police seizures are per se unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment unless such seizures are accomplished pursuant to ju | 1 | 1 |
State v. Keithgreen2 sentences2023This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Davis, 354 S.C. 348, 355 , 580 S.E.2d 778, 782 (Ct. App. 2003) (explaining that a reviewing court should give great deference to a magistrate's determination of probable cause); State v. Rodriquez, 323 S.C. 484, 490 , 476 S.E.2d 161, 165 (Ct. App. 1996) ("Generally, police seizures are per se unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment unless such seizures are accomplished pursuant to ju 2023This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Davis, 354 S.C. 348, 355 , 580 S.E.2d 778, 782 (Ct. App. 2003) (explaining that a reviewing court should give great deference to a magistrate's determination of probable cause); State v. Rodriquez, 323 S.C. 484, 490 , 476 S.E.2d 161, 165 (Ct. App. 1996) ("Generally, police seizures are per se unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment unless such seizures are accomplished pursuant to ju | 1 | 1 |
State v. Woodruffgreen2 sentences2023See State v. Frasier, 437 S.C. 625 , 633, 879 S.E.2d 762 , 766 (2022) ("[A]ppellate review of a motion to suppress based on the Fourth Amendment involves a two-step analysis."); id. at 633-34 , 879 S.E.2d at 766 ("This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion—in this case whether reasonable suspicion exists—is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Butler, 353 S.C. 383, 389 , 577 S.E.2d 498, 501 (Ct. App. 2003) ("The stopping of a vehicle and the detention of its occupants constitutes a seiz 2023See State v. Frasier, 437 S.C. 625 , 633, 879 S.E.2d 762 , 766 (2022) ("[A]ppellate review of a motion to suppress based on the Fourth Amendment involves a two-step analysis."); id. at 633-34 , 879 S.E.2d at 766 ("This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion—in this case whether reasonable suspicion exists—is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Butler, 353 S.C. 383, 389 , 577 S.E.2d 498, 501 (Ct. App. 2003) ("The stopping of a vehicle and the detention of its occupants constitutes a seiz | 1 | 1 |
State v. Butlergreen2 sentences2023See State v. Frasier, 437 S.C. 625 , 633, 879 S.E.2d 762 , 766 (2022) ("[A]ppellate review of a motion to suppress based on the Fourth Amendment involves a two-step analysis."); id. at 633-34 , 879 S.E.2d at 766 ("This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion—in this case whether reasonable suspicion exists—is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Butler, 353 S.C. 383, 389 , 577 S.E.2d 498, 501 (Ct. App. 2003) ("The stopping of a vehicle and the detention of its occupants constitutes a seiz 2023See State v. Frasier, 437 S.C. 625 , 633, 879 S.E.2d 762 , 766 (2022) ("[A]ppellate review of a motion to suppress based on the Fourth Amendment involves a two-step analysis."); id. at 633-34 , 879 S.E.2d at 766 ("This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion—in this case whether reasonable suspicion exists—is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Butler, 353 S.C. 383, 389 , 577 S.E.2d 498, 501 (Ct. App. 2003) ("The stopping of a vehicle and the detention of its occupants constitutes a seiz | 1 | 1 |
State v. Thompsongreen2 sentences2023This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Davis, 354 S.C. 348, 355 , 580 S.E.2d 778, 782 (Ct. App. 2003) (explaining that a reviewing court should give great deference to a magistrate's determination of probable cause); State v. Rodriquez, 323 S.C. 484, 490 , 476 S.E.2d 161, 165 (Ct. App. 1996) ("Generally, police seizures are per se unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment unless such seizures are accomplished pursuant to ju 2023This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Davis, 354 S.C. 348, 355 , 580 S.E.2d 778, 782 (Ct. App. 2003) (explaining that a reviewing court should give great deference to a magistrate's determination of probable cause); State v. Rodriquez, 323 S.C. 484, 490 , 476 S.E.2d 161, 165 (Ct. App. 1996) ("Generally, police seizures are per se unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment unless such seizures are accomplished pursuant to ju | 1 | 1 |
State v. Cornsgreen2 sentences2023This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Davis, 354 S.C. 348, 355 , 580 S.E.2d 778, 782 (Ct. App. 2003) (explaining that a reviewing court should give great deference to a magistrate's determination of probable cause); State v. Rodriquez, 323 S.C. 484, 490 , 476 S.E.2d 161, 165 (Ct. App. 1996) ("Generally, police seizures are per se unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment unless such seizures are accomplished pursuant to ju 2023This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Davis, 354 S.C. 348, 355 , 580 S.E.2d 778, 782 (Ct. App. 2003) (explaining that a reviewing court should give great deference to a magistrate's determination of probable cause); State v. Rodriquez, 323 S.C. 484, 490 , 476 S.E.2d 161, 165 (Ct. App. 1996) ("Generally, police seizures are per se unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment unless such seizures are accomplished pursuant to ju | 1 | 1 |
State v. Dupreegreen2 sentences2023This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Davis, 354 S.C. 348, 355 , 580 S.E.2d 778, 782 (Ct. App. 2003) (explaining that a reviewing court should give great deference to a magistrate's determination of probable cause); State v. Rodriquez, 323 S.C. 484, 490 , 476 S.E.2d 161, 165 (Ct. App. 1996) ("Generally, police seizures are per se unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment unless such seizures are accomplished pursuant to ju 2023This dual inquiry means we review the trial court's factual findings for any evidentiary support, but the ultimate legal conclusion . . . is a question of law subject to de novo review."); State v. Davis, 354 S.C. 348, 355 , 580 S.E.2d 778, 782 (Ct. App. 2003) (explaining that a reviewing court should give great deference to a magistrate's determination of probable cause); State v. Rodriquez, 323 S.C. 484, 490 , 476 S.E.2d 161, 165 (Ct. App. 1996) ("Generally, police seizures are per se unreasonable within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment unless such seizures are accomplished pursuant to ju | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in South Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.