Legal Opinion

State v. Ford

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided December 18, 1984No. 8413SC269PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAUGHN, Chief Judge.

Defendant first contends that the minimum mandatory sentence and fine imposed under G.S. 90-95(h)(l)d is significantly disproportionate to the crime and therefore constitutes cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the 8th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution and article 1, section 27 of the North Carolina Constitution. Defendant, however, entered a plea of guilty and is thereby precluded from making an appeal on this ground. G.S. 15A-1444. Moreover, even if we were to grant discretionary review we would find defendant’s argument to be without merit.

The…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Rakas v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  3. Alderman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  4. Oliver v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  5. Hester v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1924

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State v. BrownSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
  2. State v. MotenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1999
  3. State v. McNeilCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004
  4. State v. LipfordCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
  5. State v. WeakleyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2006

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