Legal Opinion

State v. Strickland

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 22, 1948PublishedCited by 45 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSeawell, J.

Two preliminary motions made by the defense demand attention: The motion for continuance; and the motion for a special venire. Both of these motions were in the sound discretion of the court. The first, according to the practice of the court, and the second by statute also, (a) S. v. Culberson, 228 N. C., 615, 46 S. E. (2d), 647; S. v. Rising, 223 N. C., 747, 28 S. E. (2d), 221; S. v. Utley, 223 N. C., 39, 25 S. E. (2d), 195; and (b) G. S., 9-29, G. S., 9-30; S. v. Casey, 212 N. C., 352, 193 S. E., 411; S. v. Levy, 187 N. C., 581, 122 S. E., 386. In neither instance is the action of the judge…

2Cases cited46 opinions

  1. State v. . DavenportSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
  2. State v. . GardnerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  3. State v. . SmoakSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  4. State v. . KigerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1894
  5. State v. . McNairSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885

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

3Cited by45 opinions

  1. State v. StephensSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  2. State v. CrowderSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  3. State v. BirchfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  4. State v. HicksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  5. State v. PierceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1997

40 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