State v. McDowell
Supreme Court of North Carolina
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
- Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Schmerber v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Kirby v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- United States v. DionisioSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Davis v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by63 opinions
- State v. BondurantSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- State v. StokesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
- State v. HillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
- State v. OliverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- State v. HutchinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
58 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.