Legal Opinion

State v. St. Clair

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided December 20, 1972No. 7222SC724PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GRAHAM, Judge.

Defendant contends that the court erred in denying his motion to quash the bill of indictment for the reason that it is insufficient in form. The bill of indictment is modeled after the one that was challenged and found sufficient in State v. Matthews, 267 N.C. 244, 148 S.E. 2d 38. This assignment of error is overruled.

Defendant also contends that the evidence was insufficient to show that he received the barbed wire, knowing that it had been stolen. Possession of recently stolen property, without more, raises no presumption that the possessor received it with knowledge that it…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. . MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  2. State v. HartCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1972
  3. State v. . SpauldingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
  4. State v. HoskinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  5. State v. MatthewsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. HaywoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  2. State v. BurchfieldCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976
  3. State v. HobbsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1975
  4. State v. BowdenCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978

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

Powered by the Exa API