Legal Opinion

State v. Perez

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided December 1, 1981No. 813SC592PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAUGHN, Judge.

Defendant argues the judgments against him should be vacated because the verdict form fails to specify with what of*93fense defendant was charged in each count. The verdicts, however, can be given proper interpretation by reference to the indictment, the evidence and the court’s instructions. State v. Hampton, 294 N.C. 242, 239 S.E. 2d 835 (1978). Defendant’s assignment of error is, therefore, overruled.

Defendant contends that the judge committed prejudicial error in that he failed to instruct the jury that it must find that defendant knowingly possessed and sold the controlled…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. ElliottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  2. State v. HamptonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
  3. State v. GleasonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1975

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. ConnardCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
  2. State v. MayseCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
  3. State v. ConnardCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API