Legal Opinion

State v. Lancaster

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided August 15, 1978No. 7826SC53PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

WEBB, Judge.

Both defendants raise four assignments of error on appeal. For brevity, we will group the assignments of error common to both defendants.

Defendants first contend that the trial court erred by restricting the cross-examination of the State’s witness, Timothy Strange. Both argue that they should have been allowed to question Timothy Strange about promises of immunity or leniency in return for his testimony. State v. Harris, 290 N.C. 681, 228 S.E. 2d 437 (1976). Defendant Lancaster also contends that he was *531prevented from effectively cross-examining the State’s witness as to the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  2. State v. BrinsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  3. State v. BeachSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
  4. State v. HaltomCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1973
  5. State v. DayeCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. KeyesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API