Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Williamson

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided September 7, 2010No. COA09-1475Published

1DissentWynn, Judge

*616I agree with the majority that Defendant’s trial was free of prejudicial error, based on the evidence there presented. Insofar as the majority implicitly recognizes that Defendant was entitled to an instruction on common law robbery, based on evidence existing at the time of his trial, I agree also with that conclusion. See State v. Joyner, 312 N.C. 779, 784, 324 S.E.2d 841, 845 (1985) (common law robbery instruction required when there was evidence rifle used during robbery was unloaded and missing firing pin). I disagree, however, that the trial court did not err in denying Defendant’s…

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Berry v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1851
  3. State v. BushSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  4. State v. EasonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1991
  5. State v. CroninSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980

34 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