Legal Opinion

State v. . Brinkley

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 18, 1927PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAdams, J.

The appeal presents three contentions: (1) That the judge had no right to determine from the testimony of witnesses that the defendant was guilty of prostitution in the first degree; (2) that the prosecution is barred by the statute of limitations; (3) that the judgment should be arrested.. The crime of prostitution is divided into two degrees and the punishment for each is prescribed by statute. O. S., 4361, 4362. For the first degree the offender shall be subject to imprisonment for not less than one nor more than three years, and for the second to imprisonment for not more than one year.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. . BrannerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
  2. State v. . FrancisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
  3. State v. . BarnesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
  4. State v. . LeeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  5. State v. . HolderSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1903

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. People v. ZamoraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  2. State v. PearsonTennessee Supreme Court · 1993
  3. State v. MeadowsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  4. State v. . DaltonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
  5. Harrell v. ScheidtSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956

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