Legal Opinion

State v. . Smith

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 10, 1933PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBkogden, J.

The State introduced evidence that a store owned by S. E. Hauser and Company at King, in Surry County, had been broken into, and certain tobacco, cigarettes, etc., had been stolen therefrom. Tbe defendant objected to all of this testimony because the bill of indictment charged the breaking and entering of the store of Hauser Brothers in Forsyth County, and stealing, transporting and receiving-stolen goods therefrom. Evidence of the crime in Surry County was apparently admitted upon the theory that it was competent upon the count for receiving stolen goods. The pertinent rule of competency…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. . DailSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  2. James v. Western North Carolina RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
  3. State v. . DeadmonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State v. McClainSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  2. State v. SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  3. State v. FowlerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  4. State v. ChristopherSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  5. State v. GammonsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963

4 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