Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Bennett

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 2, 1999No. COA98-266Published

1Dissent

Judge John

dissenting.

The majority reasons that legislative deletion of “attempt,” see 1993 N.C. Sess. Laws ch. 539, § 1150, from N.C.G.S. § 14-49.1 (1997), *192now requires evidence of significant measurable damage for a defendant to be convicted of violation of the statute and that evidence of such damage was not presented in the case sub judice. I do not agree and therefore respectfully dissent.

The majority cites no case law or statutory authority to support its imposition of a substantial measurable damage element to complete an offense under G.S. § 14-49.1. Concededly, the cases relied upon…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. ShawSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  2. State v. OxendineSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  3. State v. McAlisterCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
  4. State v. CockerhamCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1998

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API