Legal Opinion

State v. Carswell

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 28, 1978No. 53PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

COPELAND, Justice.

The Court of Appeals held that the movement of the air conditioner in this case was an insufficient taking and asportation to constitute a case of larceny against the defendant. Because we believe that there was enough evidence to send the larceny charge to the jury, we reverse the Court of Appeals on this point and reinstate the judgment of Judge Thornburg.

This case comes to the Court only on the contention that the judge erroneously denied defendant’s motion for nonsuit on the larceny charge. It is well settled that in ruling on such a motion, the evidence is considered in…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State v. ParkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  2. State v. GriffinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  3. People v. MeyerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  4. State v. HendersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  5. State v. HoltonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. State v. SumpterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
  2. State v. KingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  3. State v. MyrickSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  4. Welch v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1992
  5. State v. BarnesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1996

21 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