Legal Opinion

State v. . Cannon

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 7, 1940PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.

The record is barren of any evidence of larceny on the part of Howard Cannon, unless the possession by him of the goods on the day following their taking is evidence of such guilt. While it is very generally held that the recent possession of stolen property is a circumstance tending to show the larceny thereof by the possessor (S. v. Best, 202 N. C., 9, 161 S. E., 535), or that it raises a presumption of fact (S. v. Anderson, 162 N. C., 571, 77 S. E., 238), or a presumption of law (S. v. Graves, 72 N. C., 482), of such guilt, still it would seem that on the present record no such presumption…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. . GravesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1875
  2. State v. . ParkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
  3. State v. AndersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
  4. State v. . LassiterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
  5. State v. . BarbeeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State v. . WeinsteinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
  2. State v. . HolbrookSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
  3. State v. EllisonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  4. State v. . WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  5. State v. GatlinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954

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