Legal Opinion

State v. Martin

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided March 20, 1979No. 7830SC1089PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CARLTON, Judge.

The sole question for determination is whether the trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion for a new trial on the basis of newly discovered evidence.

G.S. 15A-1415 provides in pertinent part as follows:(a) At any time after verdict, the defendant by motion may seek appropriate relief upon any of the grounds enumerated in this section.(b) The following are the only grounds which the defendant may assert by a motion for appropriate relief made more than 10 days after entry of judgment:(6) Evidence is available which was unknown or unavailable to the defendant at the time…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. . CaseySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  2. State v. BeaverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  3. State v. CaseySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  4. State v. DixonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
  5. State v. GrantCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. ClarkCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
  2. State v. CarterCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
  3. State v. SprinkleCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980

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

Powered by the Exa API