Legal Opinion

State v. Roberts

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided March 17, 1981No. 8010SC845PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CLARK, Judge.

The defendant argues that the trial court erred in charging as follows:

“I instruct you that it is the law that when a person is found in the possession of a forged check and he is endeavoring to obtain money or advances upon it, this raises a presumption that the defendant either forged or con sented to the forging of such check, and nothing appearing, the person would be presumed to be guilty of forgery.”

Defendant relies on State v. White, 300 N.C. 494, 268 S.E. 2d 481 (1980), contending that the presumption as charged was mandatory and violated due process in shifting the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. WhiteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  2. State v. McAllisterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  3. State v. StanfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
  4. State v. CottinghamCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. SeraphemCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988
  2. State v. FlemingCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
  3. Reid v. WARDEN, CENT. PRISON, RALEIGH, NCDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · 1989
  4. State v. WalstonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984

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

Powered by the Exa API