State v. Holman
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
EAGLES, Judge.
Defendant first argues the trial court erred by denying his motion for a mistrial because “a statement made by a prospective juror during jury selection was highly prejudicial to [him] and resulted in substantial and irreparable harm to [his] case.” In this case, a prospective juror stated that if someone did this (i.e., commit the offense of indecent liberties) to one of her children, “they would be trying [her] for murder.” The prospective juror was immediately excused and the trial court instructed the remaining prospective jurors to disregard the statement. At the time of…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- State v. BanksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
- State v. KistleCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
- State v. HicksCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
- State v. LorenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
- State v. TurmanCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- United States v. KellyDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · 2013
- State v. LoveCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1997