Legal Opinion

State v. McCraw

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided July 15, 1980No. 47PublishedCited by 40 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CARLTON, Justice.

Defendant groups several assignments of error into six arguments. We find no prejudicial error and affirm.

I

Defendant first asserts that the trial court erred in failing to suppress the victim’s in-court identification. Defendant argues this in-court identification was tainted by impermissibly suggestive out-of-court identification procedures. He argues this taint was not removed by any showing that the in-court identification was based on a recollection independent of those improper out-of-court procedures. Defendant cites State v. Henderson, 285 N.C. 1, 203 S.E. 2d 10…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  2. Neil v. BiggersSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Stovall v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. Manson v. BrathwaiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  5. Foster v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969

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

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. State v. CoffeySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1990
  2. State v. RogersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
  3. State v. FairSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2001
  4. State v. OliverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  5. State v. WilsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988

35 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