Legal Opinion

State v. McDowell

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 4, 1980No. 80PublishedCited by 63 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BRITT, Justice.

We find no prejudicial error in either phase of defendant’s trial and conclude that the verdicts and judgments should not be disturbed.

Phase I — Guilt Determination

By his first assignment of error, defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for the appointment of additional counsel from Johnston County. There is no merit in this assignment.

It is manifest that the state has the responsibility to provide an indigent defendant with the effective assistance of counsel and the other necessary resources which are incident to presenting a defense in a criminal…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Schmerber v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  3. Kirby v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. United States v. DionisioSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  5. Davis v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1969

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

3Cited by63 opinions

  1. State v. BondurantSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
  2. State v. StokesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
  3. State v. HillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
  4. State v. OliverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
  5. State v. HutchinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981

58 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