State v. Sellers
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBarnhill, J.
How this cause reached this Court is of little moment. The record discloses the patent invalidity of the judgment pronounced which works a substantial injustice to the petitioner. It is our duty to take cognizance thereof and correct it, either in the exercise of our appellate or our supervisory jurisdiction, depending on how the case is presented. S. v. Shipman, 203 N.C. 325, 166 S.E. 298; S. v. Cochran, 230 N.C. 523, 53 S.E. 2d 663.
The identity of the bill of indictment for robbery to which the petitioner entered his plea cannot be successfully challenged. The bill was returned in case No.…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Blitz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- State v. . BellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
- State v. CochranSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
- State v. . JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
- State v. ChaseSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- State v. LawrenceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
- State v. WeaverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
- State v. StewartSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
- State v. AustinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- State v. MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.