Legal Opinion

State v. Blankenship

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided April 5, 1988No. 8725SC905PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

EAGLES, Judge.

Defendant first contends that the trial court erred in failing to dismiss the case at the close of the State’s evidence. Next, defendant argues that the trial court violated North Carolina Rule of Evidence 609(b) in allowing the jury to hear, on cross-examination, impeachment evidence of a prior conviction which was more than ten years old. We disagree and find that the defendant received a fair trial free of prejudicial error.

Defendant first argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss at the close of the State’s evidence. By his introduction of evidence,…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. State v. BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
  2. State v. AlbertSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  3. State v. FisherSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
  4. State v. WorthamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
  5. United States v. Leonard Edward JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1976

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State v. ArtisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
  2. Brown v. Weaver-Rogers Associates, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1998
  3. State v. ChandlerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
  4. State v. ShellyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2006
  5. State v. FarrisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989

3 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