State v. Gibson
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
CAMPBELL, Judge.
The defendant stipulated that the substance received from Agent Woodall and analyzed by Agent McSwain was heroin. He did not stipulate that Agent McSwain would have testified that it was heroin. The court did not err when, in its instruction, it recited the stipulation and charged that “no further proof is required for the facts stated in the agreement.” Compare State v. Thornton, 17 N.C. App. 225, 193 S.E. 2d 373 (1972) (first syllabus).
*307At the close of all the evidence and after the jury had been instructed and retired for deliberation, the defendant requested the court to…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Fahy v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- State v. KirbySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
- State v. PerrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
- State v. KnightSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- State v. WorthamCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974