Legal Opinion

State v. Wilson

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided April 3, 1990No. 8921SC454PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORR, Judge.

Defendant brings forward five assignments of error for which he maintains a new trial is required. We agree for the reasons set forth below and find that defendant is entitled to a new trial.

Defendant argues that the trial court impermissibly overruled defendant’s objection to the prosecutor’s jury argument about Cynthia Caldwell’s absence as an alibi witness.

In his closing remarks, the prosecutor stated that defendant’s two alibi witnesses (other than his wife), Cynthia Caldwell and “Vertie,” did not testify for defendant because they did not want to lie. The prosecutor stated:

Acco…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State v. MurraySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
  2. State v. KingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  3. State v. FinchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
  4. State v. HowardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
  5. Swofford v. CooperCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1987

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. LynchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1993
  2. State v. StanfieldCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999

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

Powered by the Exa API