Legal Opinion

State v. Barnette

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided November 7, 1989No. 8927SC200PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HEDRICK, Chief Judge.

Defendant assigns as error the trial court’s denial of his motion to dismiss at the close of all evidence. He contends the evidence of defendant’s guilt offered by the State was insufficient for submission to the jury. We disagree.

*201A motion of nonsuit in a criminal case requires the trial judge to consider all evidence “in .the light most favorable to the State, take it as true, and give the State the benefit of every reasonable inference to be drawn therefrom.” State v. Bass, 303 N.C. 267, 270, 278 S.E.2d 209, 212 (1981). Where the State relies on fingerprint evidence at…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. Marshall Norman HicksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  2. State v. StricklandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
  3. State v. MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  4. State v. TewSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  5. State v. BassSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
  2. State v. BarnetteCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989
  3. State v. ErvinCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2017
  4. State v. HobbsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004
  5. State v. WhitesideCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2008

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API