Legal Opinion

State v. McLellan

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 16, 1982No. 8116SC853PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAUGHN, Judge.

Defendant brings forward two assignments of error, neither of which discloses prejudicial error.

Defendant first argues the trial court abused its discretion in appointing a relative of the robbery victim to interpret his testimony. We disagree.

A court has the inherent authority to appoint an interpreter for the proper transaction of its business. Wise v. Short, 181 N.C. 320, 322, 107 S.E. 134, 136 (1921). Because of the possibility of inadvertent distortion of testimony, however, an interpreter should not be appointed unless necessary. Such necessity arises when the witness’s…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. United States v. AddonizioCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1971
  2. State v. GainesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
  3. State, in Interest of RrSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1979
  4. Kley v. AbellMissouri Court of Appeals · 1972
  5. Jack Fairbanks v. Henry E. Cowan, Superintendent, Kentucky State PenitentiaryCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1977

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. TorresSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
  2. United States v. RomeyUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1991
  3. State v. ButcherCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
  4. State v. EppsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2008
  5. State v. HassoumiouCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2008

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

Powered by the Exa API