Legal Opinion

State v. Gainey

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided June 16, 1976No. 7619SC81PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

BRJTT, Judge.

Defendant contends the trial court erred in permitting the witnesses Vickie and Wayne Dunn to state opinions as to the speed of defendant’s automobile as it approached the intersection where the collision occurred. We find no merit in this contention. While the period of time that they observed defendant’s approaching automobile was brief, we think it was of sufficient duration for them to form opinions as to speed. State v. Clayton, 272 N.C. 377, 158 S.E. 2d 557 (1968). Furthermore, when the opinions of the witnesses that defendant was “exceeding” 35 m.p.h. is considered along…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. ClaytonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  2. State v. WestonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  3. State v. HollingsworthSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  4. State v. SealySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Carolina v. McCallCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976

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

Powered by the Exa API