Legal Opinion

State v. Herencia

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 18, 1976No. 7512SC801Published

1Opinion of the Court

ARNOLD, Judge.

Defendant assigns error to the denial by the trial court of his motion for continuance. Such a motion is within the trial court’s discretion and the exercise of that discretion is not for review in the absence of manifest abuse of discretion. State v. Stepney, 280 N.C. 306, 185 S.E. 2d 844 (1972) ; State v. Morrison, 19 N.C. App. 717, 200 S.E. 2d 341 (1973). No abuse is shown in the denial of defendant’s motion.

*590Defendant contends that the court should have allowed his request for a voir dire on the in-court identification by Mr. Yancy. Defendant argues that since Yancy saw him…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. StepneySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  2. State v. CoxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  3. State v. MorrisonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1973
  4. State v. SmithCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API