Legal Opinion

State v. Hales

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided April 6, 1977No. 762SC786PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ARNOLD, Judge.

The court instructed the jury properly on the doctrine of possession of recently stolen goods, but defendant challenges the instruction on the ground that the doctrine is unconstitutional in light of the United States Supreme Court decision of Mullaney v. Wilbur, 421 U.S. 684, 44 L.Ed. 2d 508, 95 S.Ct. 1881 (1975). Mullaney holds that the State has the burden of proving every element of a crime and that the State cannot shift this burden of proof to the defendant. Mullaney is inapposite to the case at bar, because the so-called recent possession doctrine does not shift the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Mullaney v. WilburSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  3. State v. EppleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  4. State v. FosterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  5. State v. EvansCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1968

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. HollandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
  2. State v. DeGinaCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
  3. State v. OwensCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
  4. State v. BemberyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1977
  5. State v. CarterCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1996

2 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