State v. Miller
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partNess, Acting Chief Justice
I concur in part with the result reached by the majority, but on a different ground. The majority relies upon State v. Dasher, 278 S. C. 395, 297 S. E. (2d) 414 (1982), in which I dissented. I adhere to my views expressed in Dasher, as modified here.
The majority summarily states in a footnote that defense counsel’s post verdict motion was improper, but declines to address the issue on the basis it is not properly raised. I disagree. Appellant’s exceptions 2, 4 and 6 clearly question the trial judge’s authority to grant a judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The State’s argument as to these…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State v. DasherSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1982
- State v. DawkinsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1890
- State v. RafeSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1900
- State v. LynnSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1922
- State v. MillerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1953
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.