Legal Opinion

State v. Sherian

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 7, 1951No. 578PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDeNNY, J.

The defendants based their defense solely upon their contention that whatever assistance they rendered to James Diggs, after he feloniously assaulted Eex Howell, was done under compulsion and through fear of death or great bodily harm at the hands of Diggs, and not with the intention or for the purpose of enabling him to escape arrest and punishment.

In the charge in chief, the court instructed the jury that “the crime charged against the defendants . . . consists of the following elements: 1. The felony charged must have been committed; 2. The accused must have known that the felony had been…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. ArdreySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  2. State v. . WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  3. State v. SuttonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  4. State v. . PotterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  5. State v. . FainSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. State v. StricklandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
  2. State v. DooleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  3. State v. BrockSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  4. State v. WardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  5. State v. KluckhohnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956

7 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