Legal Opinion

State v. . Forte

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 8, 1943PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWinborne, J.

Defendant logically and convincingly presses for error in the trial below the denial of his motion for judgment as of nonsuit upon all the evidence taken in the light most favorable to the State, for that there is a fatal variance between the offense contained in the bill of indictment and the proof offered. S. v. Gibson, 169 N. C., 318, 85 S. E., 7; S. v. Corpening, 191 N. C., 751, 133 S. E., 14; S. v. Dowless, 217 N. C., 589, 9 S. E. (2d), 18. The bill charges defendant with performing an operation upon “a woman quick with child” with intent thereby to destroy the child. C. S., 4226. The…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. . GibsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
  2. Evans v. . the PeopleNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
  3. State v. . CorpeningSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  4. Foster v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1923
  5. State v. . DowlessSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. State v. HooverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  2. State v. BakerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  3. Fuller v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1949
  4. State v. SteadmanSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1948
  5. State v. . BryantSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948

11 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