Legal Opinion
State v. Cox
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided September 22, 1965PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Ctjbiam.
On the face of the record there appears a fatal error which the Court will notice ex mero motu. State v. Dunston, 256 N.C. 203, 123 S.E. 2d 480. This case is controlled by State v. Muse, 219 N.C. 226, 13 S.E. 2d 229, in which the Court said:
“When a defendant in a criminal prosecution in the Superior Court enters a plea of not guilty he may not, without changing his plea, waive his constitutional right of trial by jury, S. v. Hill, 209 N.C. 53, 182 S.E. 716, the determinative facts cannot be referred to the decision of the court even by consent-they must be found by the jury. S. v.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Sitterson v. . SittersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
- State v. . HoltSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1884
- State v. . MuseSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
- State v. . AllenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- State v. . HillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. CooperSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
- State v. MasonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
- State v. BunchCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009
- State v. BunchCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009