Legal Opinion

State v. Goforth

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided December 6, 1983No. 8328SC121PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

EAGLES, Judge.

I

Defendants assign as error the trial court’s denial of their motion for appropriate relief, after the return of the jury verdict, on the grounds that the conspiracy indictments do not charge any violation of the law. For a valid indictment, there must be such certainty in the statement of accusation as will (1) identify the offense with which the accused is sought to be charged; (2) protect the accused from being twice put in jeopardy for the same offense; (3) enable the accused to prepare for trial; and (4) enable the court, on conviction or plea of nolo contendere or guilty,…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  2. United States v. VentrescaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  3. Sgro v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  4. State v. SturdivantSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  5. State v. SparrowSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. State v. WhitakerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009
  2. State v. McCoyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
  3. State v. WashburnCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009
  4. State v. PetersonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2006
  5. State v. KeysCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987

17 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