Legal Opinion

State v. . McKeithan

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 9, 1932PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStaCY, C. J.

The narration by a number of witnesses of what Curtis Smith told them about the burning was competent as corroborative of Smith’s testimony given on the trial, and the court so limited its use at the time of its admission. It is now the rule of practice with us that when testimony is admitted, not as substantive evidence, but in corroboration or contradiction, and that fact is stated by the court when it is admitted, it will not be ground for exception that the judge does not in his charge again instruct the jury specifically upon the nature of such evidence, unless his attention is called to…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. State v. . SteeleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  2. State v. . HaneySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1837
  3. State v. . HarbertSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
  4. State v. . AshburnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
  5. State v. . Prince .Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1869

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. State v. RogersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  2. State v. . McKinnonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
  3. State v. BaileySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  4. State v. . HawkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  5. State v. McKinnonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943

14 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