Legal Opinion

State v. Parker

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 12, 1966No. 249PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBranch, J.

Defendant’s principal assignment of error challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to go to the jury and sustain the verdict. This is, admittedly, a case of circumstantial evidence. The rule in respect to the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence to carry a case to the jury has been clearly and succinctly stated by Higgins, J., in State v. Stephens, 244 N.C. 380, 93 S.E. 2d 431, as follows:

“We are advertent to the intimation in some of the decisions involving circumstantial evidence that to withstand a motion for nonsuit the circumstances must be inconsistent with innocence and must…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. State v. StephensSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  2. State v. . JohnsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  3. Lane v. BryanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  4. State v. SimmonsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  5. State v. . HolbrookSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. State v. ReeseSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
  2. State v. MainesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  3. State v. LedfordSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
  4. State v. EppleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  5. State v. MercerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986

22 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