State v. Propst
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBobbitt, J.
Ordinarily, it is for the court, in its discretion, to determine whether the circumstances brought to its attention are sufficient to call for a formal inquiry to determine whether defendant has sufficient mental capacity to plead to the indictment and conduct a rational defense. State v. Sullivan, 229 N.C. 251, 258, 49 S.E. 2d 458, 462; State v. Khoury, 149 N.C. 454, 62 S.E. 638; 21 Am. Jur. 2d, Criminal Law § 65. See Annotation, “Investigation of present sanity to determine whether accused should be put, or continue, on trial,” 142 A.L.R. 961, at 972-992.
At November 1966 Session, the…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- State v. FaustSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
- State v. GordonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- State v. . MurphySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
- State v. . PayneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
- State v. SpenceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by100 opinions
- State v. GoodmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
- State v. PinchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
- State v. LocklearSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
- State v. KirkleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- State v. MashSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
95 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.