Legal Opinion

Baysden v. State, 366 NC 370

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 25, 2013No. 522A11PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

■ PER CURIAM.

Justice BEASLEY took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. The remaining members of the Court .are equally divided, with three members voting to affirm and three members voting to reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals. Accordingly, the decision of the Court of Appeals is left undisturbed and stands without precedential value. See, e.g., Goldston v. State, 364 N.C. 416, 700 S.E.2d 223 (2010); Formyduval v. Britt, 361 N.C. 215, 639 S.E.2d 443 (2007); Pitts v. Am. Sec. Ins. Co., 356 N.C. 292, 569 S.E.2d 647 (2002).

AFFIRMED.

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Goldston v. StateSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2010
  2. Pitts v. American Security InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2002
  3. Formyduval v. BrittSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2007

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. BonetskyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016
  2. State v. DuckerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2025
  3. State v. WatkinsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2025