State v. Mitchell
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
STEELMAN, Judge.
Where defendant has not demonstrated prejudice from the trial court’s refusal to postpone the trial, or that the admission of evidence *707was plain error, a new trial is not warranted. Where the prosecutor’s closing argument was proper, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in failing to intervene ex mero motu.
I. Factual and Procedural Background
On the evening of 20 January 2007, Jamie Mitchell (“defendant”) and his girlfriend, Tenika Utley, attended a party in Apex, North Carolina. Ms. Utley left the party and went to the home of defendant’s cousin, Sequina Sidney. Some…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- United States v. CronicSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- State v. AlstonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- State v. BardenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2002
- State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2002
- State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State v. BanksCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2011
- State v. MitchellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2009
- State v. MitchellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2010
- State v. MitchellCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009
- State v. MitchellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2010