Legal Opinion

State v. Martin

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 3, 1967No. 508PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per' Curiam.'

Défendant contends' there was a fatal variance between the indictment and proof, in that the indictment charges defendant broke and entered “Hill’s Sporting Goods, Ixic., '1720 Louisburg Road, Raleigh,” and in the proof the corporation was variously referred to as “Hill’s, Inc.,” “Hill’s Sporting Goods,” or “Hill’s,” located at 1720 North Boulevard. The names were used interchangeably by the witnesses to identify the same occupant of the building and the same owner of the property.

In State v. Wyatt, 254 N.C. 220, 118 S.E. 2d 420, the indictment for embezzlement alleged ownership…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. . BellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  2. State v. HicksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  3. State v. . NashSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1882
  4. State v. WyattSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  5. State v. WilsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. VejvodaNebraska Supreme Court · 1989
  2. State v. BrownCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
  3. State v. CurrieCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  4. State v. ChristopherCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
  5. Carroll v. CITY OF KINGS MOUNTAINCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2008

2 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