State v. . Biggerstaff
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtSchenck, J.
The first assignment of error set out in appellant’s brief relates to an instruction in the charge which purports to give a definition as to what constitutes “under the influence of intoxicants,” as follows: “Our Court has said that a person is ‘under the influence’ within the meaning of the statute where his mind and muscles do not normally coordinate or where he is abnormal to any degree, from intoxication. In a prosecution under this statute our Court has said this: On the instruction that the defendant was under the influence of intoxicating liquors, if he had drunk enough to make him act…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- State v. . BrittSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
- State v. . HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
- State v. . HendricksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
- State v. . BuffkinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Jones v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. WileySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- State v. BrannonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- Bailey v. Handee Hugo's, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
- State v. DangerfieldCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1977
- State v. EversCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1968
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.