State v. Moctezuma
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
HORTON, Judge.
Defendant argues that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of substantial amounts of drugs seized at the Perkins Road trailer. Defendant contends that, since he was not charged in connection with these drugs, the fact that drugs belonging to other people were found at defendant’s residence was both irrelevant and prejudicial to defendant’s case. We agree with defendant and find that the admission of the irrelevant and prejudicial evidence requires a new trial.
Before trial, defendant filed a motion in limine to prohibit the State from asking questions and introducing…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- State v. CreasonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
- Matter of EdensSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
- State v. JenkinsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994
- State v. MelvinCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
- State v. HarperCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State v. MurrayCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
- State v. YanceyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
- State v. ButlerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2026
- State v. CobbCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2020
- State v. CobbCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2020