Legal Opinion

State v. Woodruff

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 1, 1963No. 289PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDenny, C.J.

The 'appellant assigns as error the ruling of the court below to the effect that the alleged confessions, if any, made by the defendant, were not induced by any threats or by any inducements, and to the admission of such purported confessions, together with the confession of Odell Woodruff against the defendant.

The competency of a confession is a preliminary question for the trial court, and is not ordinarily subject to review. S. v. Whitener, 191 N.C. 659, 132 S.E. 603; S. v. Fain, 216 N.C. 157, 4 S.E. 2d 319; S. v. Rogers, 216 N.C. 731, 6 S.E. 2d 499; S. v. Manning, 221 N.C. 70, 18 S.E. 2d…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. State v. . WhitenerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  2. State v. . HairstonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
  3. State v. Andrew.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1867
  4. State v. . ManningSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  5. State v. . LivingstonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State v. PruittSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  2. State v. BookerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  3. State v. FuquaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  4. State v. SilverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  5. State v. ConnleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979

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

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

Powered by the Exa API