Legal Opinion

State v. Burgess

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided January 19, 1982No. 8117SC730PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAUGHN, Judge.

Defendant makes several assignments of error. We hold that none of them disclose prejudicial error.

Defendant first excepts to the admission of testimony of two State witnesses. On direct examination, Liles testified without objection to a phone conversation he had had with Stevenson concerning the tractors: “I told Mr. Stevenson that they were hot and he stated that his friend in Siler City did not care if the price was right.”

Later, an S.B.I. agent testified to statements given to him by accomplices to the theft of the tractors. He repeated Liles’ statement which contained the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  2. State v. YanceySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
  3. State v. AycothSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  4. State v. HuntSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  5. State v. . OxendineSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. SloneCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
  2. In Re RhyneCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
  3. State v. LowryCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004

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

Powered by the Exa API