State v. Connley
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
SHARP, Chief Justice.
The assignments of error which defendant brings forward challenge the admission of certain portions of the State’s evidence and the court’s instructions to the jury.
We first consider defendant’s contention that the trial judge committed prejudicial error by permitting State’s witness Victor Holdren, a special agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, to testify about statements which defendant made to him in the emergency room at Duke Medical Center between 4:00 and 5:00 a.m. on 15 November 1976. These statements, the substance of which Holdren related to the jury,…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Mullaney v. WilburSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Patterson v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- State v. TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- State v. LarrimoreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1995
- State v. RinckSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
- State v. JacksonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
- State v. HeptinstallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- State v. WhiteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.