Legal Opinion

State v. Temple

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 6, 1981No. 96PublishedCited by 44 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

COPELAND, Justice.

Defendant argues six assignments of error on appeal. We have carefully considered each assignment and conclude that the trial court committed no error which would entitle defendant to a new trial.

Defendant first contends that the trial court erred in requiring him to present his evidence before the State put on its evidence during the hearing on his motion to suppress. Among the items of evidence that defendant sought to suppress was the confession taken from him at 3:45 p.m. on 10 July 1979. It is the State’s burden to prove the voluntariness of a confession. State v.…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Michigan v. MosleySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  3. State v. IrickSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
  4. State v. FoustSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
  5. State v. MercerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1969

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

3Cited by44 opinions

  1. United States v. John W. DowningCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
  2. State v. HennisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
  3. State v. StokesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
  4. State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
  5. State v. ArtisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1989

39 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