Legal Opinion

State v. Swift

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided July 14, 1976No. 24PublishedCited by 75 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

COPELAND, Justice.

Counsel for defendant makes a total of 63 assignments of error, based on 333 exceptions. 12 assignments have been abandoned.(1) Assignment of Error No. 1 contends it was error to deny defendant’s motion to quash the bills of indictment because defendant’s name is set out in both bills as “Tamarcus Swift (Alias Poison Ivy).”

The word “alias” is defined in Webster’s Third New International Dictionary 52, 53 (1971) as “used esp. in legal proceedings to connect the different names of anyone who has gone by or been known by two or more names.” The record in this case indicates…

2Cases cited48 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Mullaney v. WilburSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  3. State v. CovingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  4. State v. AtkinsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1969
  5. State v. TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972

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

3Cited by75 opinions

  1. People v. DillonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
  2. State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
  3. State v. FulcherSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
  4. State Ex Rel. Peacher v. SencindiverWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1977
  5. State v. IrwinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981

70 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