Legal Opinion

State v. Aiken

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided March 19, 1985No. 8419SC586PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

EAGLES, Judge.

I

Defendant first assigns as error that his trial counsel’s representation was prejudicially ineffective. We find no error.

Defendant first argues that trial counsel was ineffective in entering into a stipulation admitting into evidence the results of vaginal examination of the victim. We do not agree.

Defendant’s defense at trial was based on consent, i.e., that while he did have sexual intercourse with the victim, it was with her permission. In that context test results indicating that the victim did have sexual intercourse could not be prejudicial to defendant. We will not…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. United States v. Joseph Ward EasterCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1976
  3. State v. WeaverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  4. State v. GrierSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
  5. State v. SwiftSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. State v. HaddockCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2008
  2. State v. WorthamCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
  3. State v. WorthamCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
  4. State v. LesaneCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
  5. State v. RhueCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002

9 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