Legal Opinion

State v. Cox

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 12, 1972No. 70PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HUSKINS, Justice.

Defendant states in his brief that he has been unable to find reversible error in the trial below and simply presents the record in the hope that the Court will discover error ex mero motu. While we are not required to do so under our rules, we have nevertheless examined the entire record in view of the seriousness of the charges and the sentences imposed. The ap peal itself constitutes an exception to the judgment and presents for review any error appearing on the face of the record proper, even in the absence of proper exception and assignment. State v. Elliott, 269 N.C.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. . AllenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
  2. State v. FosterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  3. State v. JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1969
  4. State v. InglandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  5. State v. ElliottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. State v. HendersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  2. State v. BellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  3. State v. JollySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  4. State v. WilsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  5. State v. McMorrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976

19 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