Legal Opinion

State v. Small

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 15, 1977No. 36PublishedCited by 42 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BRANCH, Justice.

Defendant’s first assignment of error is that the trial judge erred in denying his motion to suppress defendant’s in-custody statements because they were not understandingly and voluntarily made.

The unquestioned rule in this jurisdiction is that the ultimate test of the admissibility of a confession is whether the confession was, in fact, understandingly and voluntarily made. State v. Bishop, 272 N.C. 283, 158 S.E. 2d 511; State v. Gray, 268 N.C. 69, 150 S.E. 2d 1, Cert. denied, 386 U.S. 911. Thus, a confession is involuntary and'not admissible into evidence when it is induced…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. State v. GraySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  3. State v. ColsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  4. State v. FoxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  5. State v. ThompsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972

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

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. State v. BarfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  2. State v. ArringtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
  3. State v. RookSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  4. State v. FullwoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
  5. State v. MilanoSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979

37 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