Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

In re: J.B.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided January 2, 2018No. COA17-400Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partDillon, Judge

I concur in the majority's conclusion to reject the juvenile's argument concerning the proof of ownership of the property which was allegedly damaged by the juvenile.

With respect to the juvenile's argument concerning the State's failure to plead in the petition that the owner was an entity capable of owning property, I recognize that for purposes of an indictment, such a mistake could be raised for the first time on appeal. However, I conclude that the owner's capability of owning property does not need have been pleaded with the same specificity as in an indictment. See State v. Jones , ---…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. State v. JonesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API