State v. Watson
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Per curiam
The defendant’s motion for judgment as of non-suit, made at the conclusion of the State’s evidence and renewed at the conclusion of all the evidence, should have been granted. The indictment charged that the defendant forced .open “a safe of R. C. H. Harriss.” The State’s evidence shows that the cabinet forced open on the occasion in question was the property of Harriss-Conners Chevrolet, Inc. This was a fatal' variance between the offense charged in the indictment and the proof. State v. Brown, 263 N.C. 786, 140 S.E. 2d 413; State v. Stinson, 263 N.C. 283, 139 S.E. 2d 558. “It is a rule of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- State v. . JacksonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- State v. StinsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
- State v. BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
- State v. . MasonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1852
3Cited by14 opinions
- State v. CoxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
- State v. AdamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1992
- State v. WeaverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2005
- State v. DowningSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
- State v. MuskellyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.