Legal Opinion

State v. Guthrie

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided May 4, 1993No. 9210SC214PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ARNOLD, Chief Judge.

Defendant’s first argument is that the court erred by not allowing him to cross-examine the victim about the letter. Effective cross-examination is a fundamental right and “is denied when a defendant is prevented from cross-examining a witness at all on a subject matter relevant to the witness’s credibility.” State v. Durham, 74 N.C. App. 159, 163, 327 S.E.2d 920, 923 (1985). The denial of that right “is constitutional error of the first magnitude and no amount of showing of want of prejudice would cure it.” Id. But, the defendant’s right to cross-examination is not…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. YoungerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  2. State v. BaronCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
  3. State v. DurhamCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
  4. State v. SmithCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. People v. JovanovicAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
  2. State v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004
  3. State v. BassCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1996
  4. State v. PallasCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
  5. State v. BrodieCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005

7 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