Legal Opinion

State v. Hamer

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 7, 1954No. 363PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtErvin, J.

The prisoner insists initially that he is entitled to a new trial because the trial judge erred in admitting his second extrajudicial statement in evidence. He bases tbis contention on the theory that all the evidence adduced on the preliminary inquiry showed this statement to he involuntary in character.

We accept as valid the definition of Dean Wigmore, the great master of the law of evidence, that “a confession is an acknowledgment in express words hy the accused in a criminal case of the truth of the guilty fact charged or of some essential part of it.” Wigmore on Evidence (3d Ed., 1940),…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. State v. RogersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  2. State v. . RobertsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1827
  3. State v. . MooreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
  4. State v. . StricklandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  5. State v. StricklandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948

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

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. State v. FoxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  2. State v. FoxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  3. State v. FletcherSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  4. State v. CooperSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  5. Hof v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1995

27 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