State v. Mills
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Per curiam
While the defendant duly noted exceptions (1) to the trial court’s rulings on the admissibility of evidence and (2) to parts of the charge, his assignments of error do nothing more than refer to the pages of the record where the alleged errors may be discovered. The assignments, therefore, fail to comply with Rule 19(3), Rules of Practice in the Supreme Court, 221 N.C. 543. “Just what will constitute a sufficiently specific assignment must depend very largely upon the special circumstances of the particular case; but always the very error relied upon should be definitely and clearly…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Steelman v. . BenfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
3Cited by6 opinions
- Bridges v. GrahamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- State v. HendersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
- Nichols v. McFarlandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1958
- State v. SawyerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
- Phillips v. NORTH CAROLINA RAILROAD COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.