Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 South Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 2011–2026 4 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. Hatchergreen2 sentences2026See State v. Pulley, 423 S.C. 371 , 377, 815 S.E.2d 461, 464 (2018) ("[A] party offering into evidence fungible items such as drugs or blood samples must establish a complete chain of custody as far as practicable." (quoting Hatcher, 392 S.C. at 91 , 708 S.E.2d at 753 )); Hatcher, 392 S.C. at 94-95 , 708 S.E.2d at 754-55 ("The trial [court]'s exercise of discretion must be reviewed in the light of the following factors: '. . . the nature of the article, the circumstances surrounding the preservation and custody of it, and the likelihood of intermeddlers tampering with it.'" (quoting United Sta 2026See State v. Pulley, 423 S.C. 371 , 377, 815 S.E.2d 461, 464 (2018) ("[A] party offering into evidence fungible items such as drugs or blood samples must establish a complete chain of custody as far as practicable." (quoting Hatcher, 392 S.C. at 91 , 708 S.E.2d at 753 )); Hatcher, 392 S.C. at 94-95 , 708 S.E.2d at 754-55 ("The trial [court]'s exercise of discretion must be reviewed in the light of the following factors: '. . . the nature of the article, the circumstances surrounding the preservation and custody of it, and the likelihood of intermeddlers tampering with it.'" (quoting United Sta | 6 | 6 |
United States v. De Larosagreen2 sentences2026See State v. Pulley, 423 S.C. 371 , 377, 815 S.E.2d 461, 464 (2018) ("[A] party offering into evidence fungible items such as drugs or blood samples must establish a complete chain of custody as far as practicable." (quoting Hatcher, 392 S.C. at 91 , 708 S.E.2d at 753 )); Hatcher, 392 S.C. at 94-95 , 708 S.E.2d at 754-55 ("The trial [court]'s exercise of discretion must be reviewed in the light of the following factors: '. . . the nature of the article, the circumstances surrounding the preservation and custody of it, and the likelihood of intermeddlers tampering with it.'" (quoting United Sta 2022"The trial [court's] exercise of discretion must be reviewed in the light of the following factors: '. . . the nature of the article, the circumstances surrounding the preservation and custody of it, and the likelihood of intermeddlers tampering with it." Id. at 94-95, 708 S.E.2d at 754-55 (omission in original) (quoting United States v. De Larosa, 450 F.2d 1057, 1068 (3d Cir. 1971)). | 5 | 6 |
State v. Pulleygreen1 sentence2026See State v. Pulley, 423 S.C. 371 , 377, 815 S.E.2d 461, 464 (2018) ("[A] party offering into evidence fungible items such as drugs or blood samples must establish a complete chain of custody as far as practicable." (quoting Hatcher, 392 S.C. at 91 , 708 S.E.2d at 753 )); Hatcher, 392 S.C. at 94-95 , 708 S.E.2d at 754-55 ("The trial [court]'s exercise of discretion must be reviewed in the light of the following factors: '. . . the nature of the article, the circumstances surrounding the preservation and custody of it, and the likelihood of intermeddlers tampering with it.'" (quoting United Sta | 1 | 1 |
State v. Josephgreen2 sentences2020See State v. Pagan, 369 S.C. 201, 208 , 631 S.E.2d 262, 265 (2006) ("The admission of evidence is within the discretion of the [circuit] court and will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion."); State v. Hatcher, 392 S.C. 86, 94 , 708 S.E.2d 750, 754 (2011) ("Courts have abandoned inflexible rules regarding the chain of custody and the admissibility of evidence in favor of a rule granting discretion to the [circuit] courts."); id. at 94-95 , 708 S.E.2d at 754-55 ("The [circuit court's] exercise of discretion must be reviewed in the light of the following factors: '. . . the nature of th 2020See State v. Pagan, 369 S.C. 201, 208 , 631 S.E.2d 262, 265 (2006) ("The admission of evidence is within the discretion of the [circuit] court and will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion."); State v. Hatcher, 392 S.C. 86, 94 , 708 S.E.2d 750, 754 (2011) ("Courts have abandoned inflexible rules regarding the chain of custody and the admissibility of evidence in favor of a rule granting discretion to the [circuit] courts."); id. at 94-95 , 708 S.E.2d at 754-55 ("The [circuit court's] exercise of discretion must be reviewed in the light of the following factors: '. . . the nature of th | 1 | 1 |
State v. Pagangreen2 sentences2020See State v. Pagan, 369 S.C. 201, 208 , 631 S.E.2d 262, 265 (2006) ("The admission of evidence is within the discretion of the [circuit] court and will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion."); State v. Hatcher, 392 S.C. 86, 94 , 708 S.E.2d 750, 754 (2011) ("Courts have abandoned inflexible rules regarding the chain of custody and the admissibility of evidence in favor of a rule granting discretion to the [circuit] courts."); id. at 94-95 , 708 S.E.2d at 754-55 ("The [circuit court's] exercise of discretion must be reviewed in the light of the following factors: '. . . the nature of th 2020See State v. Pagan, 369 S.C. 201, 208 , 631 S.E.2d 262, 265 (2006) ("The admission of evidence is within the discretion of the [circuit] court and will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion."); State v. Hatcher, 392 S.C. 86, 94 , 708 S.E.2d 750, 754 (2011) ("Courts have abandoned inflexible rules regarding the chain of custody and the admissibility of evidence in favor of a rule granting discretion to the [circuit] courts."); id. at 94-95 , 708 S.E.2d at 754-55 ("The [circuit court's] exercise of discretion must be reviewed in the light of the following factors: '. . . the nature of th | 1 | 1 |
Albert Lopez Gallego v. United Statesgreen1 sentence2011“If upon the consideration of such factors the trial judge is satisfied that in reasonable probability the article has not been changed in important respects, he may permit its introduction in evidence.” Gallego v. United States, 276 F.2d 914, 917 (9th Cir.1960). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in South Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
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.