Legal Opinion

State v. Markham

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided July 23, 1969No. 6915SC343PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMorris, J.

Defendant argues that the trial judge committed error in allowing the State’s witnesses Jeffries and Russell to testify that they observed particles of flesh and blood on the right fender of the defendant’s automobile. He has cited no authority for this argument. We think this argument is without merit. One need not be an expert to recognize particles of flesh and blood. The witnesses did not state that this matter came from the body of Kemp Page. Defendant argues that this testimony was a conclusion and, therefore, not admissible. Perhaps it was possible for the witnesses to describe the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. . CopeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  2. State v. . StansellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
  3. State v. MasseySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  4. State v. TingenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  5. State v. ReddishSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. StewardsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1977
  2. State v. HugginsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
  3. State v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API