Legal Opinion

State v. Taylor

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 7, 1954No. 365PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

The defendant assigns as error certain portions of the charge. However, no exceptions were taken to such portions of the charge upon which an assignment of error may rest.

It is the general rule that assignments of error not supported by exceptions duly and timely noted, will not be considered upon appeal. S. v. Oliver, 213 N.C. 386, 196 S.E. 325; In re Will of Beard, 202 N.C. 661, 163 S.E. 748; Dixon v. Osborne, 201 N.C. 489, 160 S.E. 579. For exceptions to this rule see S. v. Dockery, 238 N.C. 222, 77 S.E. 2d 664, and S. v. Parnell, 214 N.C. 467, 199 S.E. 601.

The instant case, however, does…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. State v. DockerySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  2. State v. . CarrollSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
  3. Dixon v. . OsborneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  4. In Re Will of BeardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
  5. State v. . BowenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  2. State v. TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  3. Beaver v. Crawford Paint Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  4. State v. CrumlinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  5. State v. CunninghamCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1977

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

Powered by the Exa API