Legal Opinion

State v. Fredell

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 11, 1973No. 30PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MOORE, Justice.

The sole question presented by this appeal is: Did the trial court err in denying defendant’s motion to quash the warrant on the ground that the statute under which the defendant is charged is unconstitutionally vague and indefinite?

A motion to quash may challenge the constitutionality of the statute. State v. Vestal, 281 N.C. 517, 189 S.E. 2d 152 (1972); State v. Brewer, 258 N.C. 533, 129 S.E. 2d 262 (1962); State v. Glidden Co., 228 N.C. 664, 46 S.E. 2d 860 (1948).

Defendant was charged with a violation of G.S. 14-318.2(a), which provides:

“Any parent of a child less than 16…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. United States v. RainesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  2. Connolly v. Union Sewer Pipe Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1902
  3. State v. WaddellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
  4. In Re BurrusSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1969
  5. Jackson v. Guilford County Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1969

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

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Diana Pepper Sevigny v. Andrew F. Dicksey, Individually, and the Town of Carolina Beach, (Two Cases)Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1988
  2. In Re ClarkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  3. In Re the Appeal of MartinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  4. State v. ByrdSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
  5. State v. MappCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980

20 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