Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Ellis

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided May 29, 2001No. 25296Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBurnett, Justice

I agree with the Court’s conclusion on the sentencing issue in Part B of the majority opinion. However, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s holding in Part A.

Sergeant Walters was qualified as an expert in crime scene processing. He testified there was a bullet hole in the left pedal of the victim’s bicycle. He also testified that the bullet holes in the victim’s right pants leg and the ace bandage worn on that leg did not line up with the two superficial wounds in that leg unless the victim’s leg had been bent when he was shot. Over appellant’s objection, Sergeant Walters testified…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hopt v. UtahSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  2. State v. Von DohlenSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1996
  3. State v. SullivanSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1895
  4. State v. GilchristSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2000
  5. State v. WilkinsCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1991

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API