Legal Opinion

State v. Thompson

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 3, 1981No. 8029SC615PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WHICHARD, Judge.

Defendant first contends in her brief that her convictions are “void for fatal variance” in that she was tried and convicted for violations of G.S. 14-90, which is “a private sector embezzlement statute,” when she should have been tried for violations of G.S. 14-92, a statute “applicable to public officials.” The indictments against defendant do not refer specifically to any statute, and they are sufficient to charge defendant with violations of either G.S. 14-90 or G.S. 14-92. Both statutes create a felony offense, and the sentence imposed for each offense of which defendant…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. HuntSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
  2. State v. . SimsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  3. State v. KingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  4. State v. HewettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
  5. Nicholson v. Eureka Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1911

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. ParksCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989
  2. State v. StanleyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
  3. State v. BrittCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
  4. State v. JonesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
  5. State v. MackCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API