State v. Jean
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
MEYER, Justice.
Defendant first contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress the identification testimony of Mrs. Wilson, arguing that the testimony was the product of a pretrial identification procedure which was so impermissibly suggestive that it created a substantial likelihood of irreparably mistaken identification.
Following a voir dire hearing on defendant’s motion to suppress, the trial court made the following findings of fact:
2. That Alice Kathleen Wilson retired for bed at approximately one o’clock A.M. on the 21st of July and before retiring for bed she left…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- State v. HardySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
- State v. SmallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
- State v. ChatmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- State v. McKennaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
- State v. LynchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- State v. FletcherSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2017
- State v. GoldmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
- State v. O'HANLANCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
- Lesly Jean v. Nathan A. Rice, Warden Lacy Thornburg, Attorney General of North CarolinaCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1991
- State v. WestSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.