State v. . Whitley
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
Stacy, O. J.
Outside of the technical questions, presently to be considered, the case upon trial narrowed itself principally to issues of fact determinable alone by the jury.
Under the motion to nonsuit, the defendants say the record discloses a fatal variance between the indictment and the proof, in that the ownership of the property is laid in “Cannon Mills Company,” whereas the State’s evidence tends to show the stolen goods to be the property of “Cannon Mills.” S. v. Harris, 195 N. C., 306, 141 S. E., 883; S. v. Harbert, 185 N. C., 760, 118 S. E., 6; S. v. Gibson, 170 N. C., 697, 86 S. E.,…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- State v. . BealSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
- State v. . BradySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
- State v. . HarbertSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
- Bisanar v. . SuttlemyreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
- Sitterson v. . SittersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- State v. HammondsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
- State v. ChildsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
- State v. . UtleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
- State v. . HowleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
- State v. McNeelySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.