Legal Opinion

State v. Locklear

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided July 20, 1977No. 7716SC117PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MORRIS, Judge.

In his initial argument on appeal, defendant contends that the trial judge erred in instructing the jury concerning the doctrine of possession of recently stolen goods.

“It is the general rule in this State that one found in the unexplained possession of recently stolen property is presumed to be the thief. This is a factual presumption and is strong or weak depending on circumstances — the time between the theft and the possession, the type of property involved, and its legitimate availability in the community.” State v. Raynes, 272 N.C. 488, 491, 158 S.E. 2d 351, 353-54 (1968).

I…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. WhittemoreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  2. State v. EppleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  3. State v. FosterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  4. State v. CooperSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1969
  5. State v. ClyburnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State v. BaileyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  2. State v. DillardCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988
  3. State v. CurrieCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  4. State v. MillerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
  5. State v. BoothCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989

5 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