Legal Opinion

State v. Stinson

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 16, 1966No. 821PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Per curiam

We have carefully examined the defendant’s assignments of error and find them without merit. The motion for continuance was addressed to the discretion of the court. The motion for a directed verdict was properly denied. The court’s charge presented fairly the burden the law required the State to carry before the jury could render a verdict of guilty on either of the charges. Error in the trial or reason why the verdict and judgment should be disturbed are not disclosed.

No error.

Moore, J., not sitting.

2Cited by20 opinions

  1. State v. StepneySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  2. State v. BaldwinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  3. State v. BrowerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  4. State v. CameronSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
  5. State v. CradleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972

15 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