Legal Opinion

State v. Ward

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 17, 2010No. 68A99-3PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HUDSON, Justice.

Because N.C.G.S. § 15A-2005(e) does not explicitly prohibit a trial court from submitting the special issue of mental retardation to the jury in a bifurcated, rather than unitary, capital sentencing proceeding, we hold that the legislature has left that determination to the sound discretion of the capable trial judges of our State. Such a holding is consistent with the long-standing principle that when a statute is silent on whether to bifurcate, trial judges have the inherent authority and discretion to manage proceedings before them. Here, the record does not reflect an…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. Gregg v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Atkins v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  4. Matter of MontgomerySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
  5. White v. WhiteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. Wilkie v. City of Boiling Spring LakesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2018
  2. Wake County v. Hotels.com, L.P.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2014
  3. State v. MorganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2019
  4. State v. FletcherSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2017
  5. STARK EX REL. JACOBSEN v. Ford Motor Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 2012

36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API