Legal Opinion

State v. Hendrickson

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided October 15, 1996No. COA95-1062PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ARNOLD, Chief Judge.

Defendant first assigns error to the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress because the findings of fact are not supported by competent evidence in the record. We disagree.

“This Court must determine whether these findings of fact support the trial court’s conclusions of law, and if so, the trial court’s conclusions of law are binding on appeal.” State v. West, 119 N.C. App. 562, 565, 459 S.E.2d 55, 57 (citing State v. Brooks, 337 N.C. 132, 140-141, 446 S.E.2d 579, 585 (1994)), disc. review denied, 341 N.C. 656, 462 S.E.2d 524 (1995).

Defendant specifically assigns…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. United States v. MendenhallSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  3. United States v. SokolowSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. Reid v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. State v. BrooksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1994

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State v. MacKeyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2011
  2. State v. McClendonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1998
  3. State v. GravesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
  4. State v. ForemanCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
  5. State v. CarmonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2003

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