Legal Opinion

State v. Chisholm

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 19, 2013No. COA12-901PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

STEELMAN, Judge.

*593Where evidence was sufficient to establish one of three statutory factors defining a counterfeit controlled substance and to provide an inference of defendant’s intent to sell or deliver, the trial court properly denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the charge of possession with the intent to sell or deliver a counterfeit controlled substance. Where there was sufficient evidence of incriminating factors to support constructive possession, the trial court properly denied defend-ant’s motion to dismiss the charge of possession with the intent to sell or deliver cocaine. Where…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. State v. SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  2. State v. PowellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  3. State v. HarveySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  4. State v. BagleyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2007
  5. State v. BaxterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. United States v. Gregory StarkieCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2019

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

Powered by the Exa API