Legal Opinion

State v. McAuliffe

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided August 7, 1974No. 7430SC367PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CARSON, Judge.

Prior to the commencement of the trial, the defendant moved to quash the bill of indictment on the grounds that the presumption that possession of more than five grams of marijuana is possession for the purpose of sale, is unconstitutional. The denial of this motion to quash constitutes his first assignment of error. This assignment of error is without merit. Presumptions are lawful as long as there is a rational connection between the fact to be proved and the facts which create this foundation. Barnes v. United States, 412 U.S. 837, 93 S.Ct. 2357, 37 L.ed. 2d 380 (1973) ;…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Roviaro v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Barnes v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  3. United States v. RomanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  4. State v. RieraSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  5. State v. FletcherSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. HairstonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
  2. State v. TaylorCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
  3. State v. KaplanCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974
  4. Kimberly M. Mattingly v. Daniel T. McCrystalCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API