Legal Opinion

State v. Bailey

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided March 6, 1990No. 8918SC807PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WELLS, Judge.

Defendant first assigns as error the trial court’s allowing the State’s motion to correct the indictments to properly reflect the name of the victim. Defendant argues that this correction constitutes an impermissible amendment to the indictments. We disagree.

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-923(e) provides that “[a] bill of indictment may not be amended.” An amendment within the meaning of this statute is “any change in the indictment which would substantially alter the charge set forth in the indictment.” State v. Marshall, 92 N.C. App. 398, 374 S.E.2d 874 (1988) (quoting State v. Price,…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. State v. OdomSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
  2. State v. WalkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
  3. State v. BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
  4. State v. PriceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
  5. State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. State v. SnyderSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1996
  2. State v. HollimanCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
  3. State v. JoyceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1991
  4. State v. CampbellCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
  5. State v. GradyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000

12 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