Legal Opinion

State v. . Jaynes

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 28, 1930PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Stacy, C. J.,

after stating the case: The second sentence of 3 C. S., 3411(d) is as follows: “It shall be unlawful to have or possess any liquor or property designated for the manufacture of liquor intended for use in violating this article, or which has been so used, and no property rights shall exist in any such liquor or property.” The word “designated,” appearing herein, was evidently intended for “designed,” and may be so regarded. S. v. Bell, 184 N. C., 701, 115 S. E., 190. We omit any consideration of the clause, “or which has been so used,” as it is unnecessary to decide its meaning or…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. . BellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
  2. State v. . AddorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
  3. State v. . GoodingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
  4. State v. Burgess.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  5. State v. . HarrisonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State v. McLambSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  2. State v. GriffinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  3. State v. . JacksonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
  4. State v. . GrahamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  5. Myers v. . BarnhardtSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932

5 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