Legal Opinion

State v. . Hodgin

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 30, 1936PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClarkson, J.

First. Defendant made exception and assignment of error to the exclusion of the testimony of H. C. Whiteheart above set forth. We do not think that this exception and assignment of error can be sustained.

In S. v. Turpin, 77 N. C., 473 (476-7), we find: “The general rule prevailing in most of the American states is, that sucb evidence is not admissible, and in this State sucb a general rule is well established. S. v. Barfield, 8 Ire., 344; Bottoms v. Kent, 3 Jones, 154; S. v. Floyd, 6 Jones, 392; S. v. Hogue, 6 Jones, 381. But these cases which are cited as establishing a general rule…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. . TurpinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1877
  2. State v. . BaldwinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
  3. State v. . LanceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
  4. State v. . BaldwinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
  5. State v. . DickeySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. State v. VestalSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  2. State v. GrundlerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
  3. State v. McEachernSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
  4. State v. . BiggsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
  5. State v. RawleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953

9 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