State v. Thompson
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
HILL, Judge.
Defendant first argues that the trial judge erred in denying his motion for continuance because of the unavailability of an alibi witness. As a general rule, the grant or denial of a motion for continuance is in the sound discretion of the trial judge. Nevertheless, since defendant contends that the court’s action prohibited the exercise of his right to confront his accusers and witnesses as guaranteed by the Federal and State Constitutions, the question presented is one of law and thus is reviewable on appeal. See State v. Smathers, 287 N.C. 226, 214 S.E. 2d 112 (1975).
The…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- State v. OdomSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- United States v. GraysonSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- State v. AhearnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- State v. DavisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
- State v. FennellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. AbdullahSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- Commonwealth v. ColemanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1984
- Commonwealth v. ColemanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1984
- State v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983