State v. Harris
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
MOORE, Justice.
Defendant first attacks the North Carolina rule that places upon defendant the burden of proof on the defense of insanity. Defendant concedes in his brief that North Carolina has long adhered to the view that the defense of insanity is an affirmative defense which must be shown by the defendant to the satisfaction of the jury. See State v. Caddell, 287 N.C. 266, 215 S.E. 2d 348 (1975); State v. Cooper, 286 N.C. 549, 213 S.E. 2d 305 (1975), and cases cited therein. He contends, however, that this is error because of the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Mullaney v.…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Mullaney v. WilburSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Leland v. OregonSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- State v. CutlerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
- State v. BentonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- State v. OliverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- State v. IrickSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
- State v. StricklandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- State v. JerrettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- State v. KirkleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.