North Carolina State Bar v. Hall
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
SHARP, Chief Justice.
In this disciplinary action respondent admits he entered a plea of nolo contendere in the Federal District Court to the charge of receiving and possessing chattels valued at less than $100 knowing them to have been stolen or embezzled (a violation of Title 18, U.S.C., § 659), but denies he committed the offense charged. The question presented is whether respondent’s plea of nolo contendere entitles the State Bar to summary judgment authorizing disciplinary action against respondent. The answer is found in our decisions defining the legal effect of a plea of nolo…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- North Carolina v. AlfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Fox v. ScheidtSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
- State v. SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
- State v. CooperSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
- State v. ThomasSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- State v. HoldenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
- Eisenberg v. COM., DEPT. OF PUB. WEL.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- State v. HedgepethCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
- Davis v. HiattSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1990
- State v. PettyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.