Legal Opinion

State v. Pope

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided December 18, 1974No. 745SC802PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ARNOLD, Judge.

In his first assignment of error defendant contends that in the following instance he was denied the right to confront the witnéss, Lenny Harrelson:

“Q. Of course, you realize if you had anything to do :with starting the argument with him that your family might hold you responsible for your sister’s death, don’t you?

Me. Moore: Objection.

Court : Sustained.”

Latitude of cross-examination is a matter well within the discretion of the trial court. State v. McPherson, 276 N.C. 482, 172 S.E. 2d 50; State v. Dickens, 11 N.C. App. 892, 181 S.E. 2d 257. Although defendant is entitled to…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. State v. MercerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1969
  2. State v. WynnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  3. State v. JenningsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  4. State v. GaitenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  5. State v. CraddockSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. State v. LaneCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994
  2. State v. GartlanCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
  3. State v. BakerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
  4. State v. HaightCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
  5. State v. PopeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975

8 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