Legal Opinion

State v. Hill

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided September 19, 1978No. 785SC320PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ARNOLD, Judge.

Defendant first contends that the trial court erred in failing to dismiss the charge of felonious breaking or entering, and in charging the jury as to his intent to commit larceny. We disagree.

N.C.G.S. § 14-54 makes it a crime to break or enter any building “with intent to commit . . . larceny therein.” An essential element of the crime is that the intent exist at the time of the breaking or entering. Defendant argues that the evidence, considered as it must be in the light most favorable to the State, State v. Murphy, 280 N.C. 1, 184 S.E. 2d 845 (1971), is not sufficient to…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. StephensSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  2. State v. AccorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  3. State v. MurphySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  4. State v. . OakleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
  5. State v. RedmondCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1972

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State v. OcheltreeWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1982
  2. State v. SaltersCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
  3. State v. Karshia Bliamy LyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2008
  4. State v. CampbellCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2014
  5. State v. CostiganCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981

4 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