Legal Opinion

State v. Capps

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided March 15, 1983No. 8210SC761PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAUGHN, Chief Judge.

Defendants’ first assignment is that the trial court erred in denying their motions to dismiss. They contend the evidence was insufficient to link them to the crime. A motion to dismiss requires the trial judge to consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, giving the State the benefit of every reasonable inference. State v. Vincent, 278 N.C. 63, 178 S.E. 2d 608 (1971). The question is whether there is substantial evidence, direct, circumstantial, or both, to support a finding that the offense charged has been committed and the accused committed it.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  2. State v. VincentSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  3. State v. StewartSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
  4. State v. SheltonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
  5. State v. BerryCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
  2. State v. HerbinCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
  3. State v. WardCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
  4. State v. MarlowCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API