Legal Opinion

State v. Simmons

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 16, 1982No. 8118SC769PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MARTIN (Robert M.), Judge.

Prior to his trial, defendant filed a motion requesting that the State be required to furnish the identity of an informant or, in the alternative, that the cases against him be dismissed. The person defendant wanted identified in full was the man called “Pete.” The record shows that, on the day of the trial, his full name was divulged. Defendant’s alternative motion to dismiss was denied by the trial court.

The defendant now assigns as error the trial court’s denial of his motion to disclose the full identity of “Pete” and his motion to dismiss. Citing Roviaro v.…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Roviaro v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Argersinger v. HamlinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Scher v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  4. State v. MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  5. State v. BlackwellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Hawkins v. FreemanCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1999
  2. State v. MichaelCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
  3. Hawkins v. FreemanCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1999
  4. State v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
  5. Hawkins v. FreemanCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1999

3 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