Legal Opinion

State v. Lofton

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided January 17, 1984No. 8212SC1200PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAUGHN, Chief Judge.

Defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for dismissal at the close of the State’s case, there being insufficient evidence to take the case to the jury. We find no error.

Our scope of review on a motion for. dismissal is to determine whether the State produced substantial evidence that the offense charged was committed and that defendant was the perpetrator. State v. McKinney, 288 N.C. 113, 215 S.E. 2d 578 (1975); see State v. Powell, 299 N.C. 95, 261 S.E. 2d 114 (1980). The evidence, whether direct, circumstantial, or both, must be viewed in the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. State v. PowellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  2. State v. McKinneySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  3. State v. McWilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  4. State v. ThompsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
  5. State v. ArnoldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State v. BaileyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2003
  2. State v. AlversonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988
  3. State v. MoormanCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
  4. State v. SuittCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989
  5. In Re JHCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2006

6 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