Legal Opinion

State v. Morgan

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided April 15, 2008No. COA07-745PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WYNN, Judge.

The United States Supreme Court has held that “[a]n order entering ... a finding [that the evidence is insufficient as a matter of law to sustain a conviction] meets the definition of acquittal that our double-jeopardy cases have consistently used].]” 1 Because we find that the District Court’s dismissal of criminal charges against the defendant in this case was based on a finding that the State’s evidence was insufficient as a matter of law, we conclude that the Double Jeopardy Clause bars the State’s appeal. We therefore reverse the order of the Superior Court.

At 2:37 a.m. on 4…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. United States v. ScottSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. United States v. Martin Linen Supply Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
  3. Smalis v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Smith v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
  5. State v. GardnerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. FowlerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009
  2. State v. PettyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2011
  3. State v. MorganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2008

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

Powered by the Exa API