Legal Opinion

State v. Conyers

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided October 4, 1977No. 7618SC1016PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PARKER, Judge.

Defendant assigns error to the admission of the in-court identification testimony of the State’s witnesses, Robertson and Fuller. He contends this testimony should have been excluded because of impermissibly suggestive out-of-court photographic identification procedures. In support of this contention, defendant points out that a border on two of the group of eight photographs which were shown separately to each witness was tinged with yellow; that one of the photographs with a yellow tinge on the border was that of the defendant; and that the other photograph with a yellow tinge…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. State v. BryantSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  2. State v. ThompsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  3. State v. TuggleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  4. State v. WoodsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  5. State v. KnightSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. WatsonWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Young v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 2016
  3. State v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
  4. State v. CarrollCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
  5. State v. CarrollCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API