Legal Opinion

State v. . Jackson

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 5, 1893PublishedCited by 9 opinions

MotioN to re-instato appeal. (See State v. Jackson, supra, page 849).

1Opinion of the Court

Clark, J.:

This was a motion to re-instato this appeal dismissed heretofore at this Term. By consent the case was argued on its merits as well as on the motion, in order to avoid the possible necessity, if the motion were granted, of counsel returning here for another argument. We do not find it necessary to pass upon the other points, since if the motion were granted there is no merit in the grounds of the appeal itself. The appellant was defended by two able counsel below and was convicted by a jury, to which he raised no objection, of the larceny of some pigs. There was some evidence…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Boon v. . MurphySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
  2. Banks v. Gay Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
  3. State v. . JacobsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State v. SpencerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  2. State v. HowardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1901
  3. State v. . Howard-Gold Brick CaseSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1901
  4. State v. BaldwinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
  5. State v. . BaldwinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919

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