Legal Opinion

State v. Thomas

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided December 11, 1968No. 6820SC463PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBritt, J.

The sole assignment of error brought forward in defendant’s brief is that the sentence imposed on defendant constituted cruel and unusual punishment.

In State v. Bruce, 268 N.C. 174, 150 S.E. 2d 216, in an opinion by Parker, C.J., we find the following:

“We have held in case after case that when the punishment does not exceed the limits fixed by the statute, it cannot be considered cruel and unusual punishment in a constitutional sense. S. v. Stansbury, 230 N.C. 589, 55 S.E. 2d 185; S. v. Welch, 232 N.C. 77, 59 S.E. 2d 199; S. v. Whaley, 263 N.C. 824, 140 S.E. 2d 305; S. v. Stubbs, 266 N.C.…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State v. BruceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  2. State v. . GibsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  3. State v. WelchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  4. State v. StansburySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  5. State v. MorrowSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. PateCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1973
  2. State v. LeeCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974

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

Powered by the Exa API