State v. Hankerson
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
EXUM, Justice.
I
Defendant assigns as error the denial of his motions for judgment as of nonsuit. Judge Arnold’s dissent was on the basis- that nonsuit should have been allowed. Reviewing this assignment, we consider all of the evidence actually admitted, whether from the State or defendant, in the light most favorable to the State, resolve any contradictions and discrepancies therein in the State’s favor, and give the State the benefit of all reasonable inferences from the evidence. State v. Cutler, 271 N.C. *637379, 382, 156 S.E. 2d 679, 681 (1967). Defendant more specifically urges that this…
2Cases cited78 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Bruton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
73 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by169 opinions
- Reed v. RossSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Hankerson v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- State v. BondurantSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- State v. McCullumWashington Supreme Court · 1983
- State v. HutchinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
164 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.