State v. Boyd
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
MOORE, Justice.
Assignments of error Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19 are not discussed in defendant’s brief and are, therefore, deemed abandoned under Rule 28, Rules of Practice in the Supreme Court, 254 N.C. 783, 810; State v. Baldwin, 276 N.C. 690, 174 S.E. 2d 526.
Assignments of error Nos. 7, 20, 21, 22 and 23 relate to alleged errors in the charge. In each assignment the defendant merely says: “The trial judge committed prejudicial error in charging the jury as follows:”, and then quotes a portion of the charge. The assignments do not set out the…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- State v. BentonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
- Pratt v. BishopSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
- State v. . BensonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
- State v. PropstSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
- State v. FoxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Investment Properties of Asheville, Inc. v. AllenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
- State v. FeltonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
- State v. MatthewsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
- State v. HinesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
- State v. SpringsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1977
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.