Legal Opinion

State v. Cauthen

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided July 11, 1973No. 7310SC426PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HEDRICK, Judge.

Defendants contend that Mr. and Mrs. Young’s and Miss Ashe’s in-court identifications of them as the perpetrators of the robbery were tainted by unlawful and unconstitutional out of court confrontations and identification procedures.

*593Upon objection by defendants to the in-court identification of them as the perpetrators of the crime charged, the trial court conducted a voir dire hearing in the absence of the jury where, after hearing the testimony of Howard Young, Edna Young, Minnie Ashe and various police officers as to all out of court identification procedures, the judge made…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. HatcherSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  2. State v. BarrowSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  3. State v. HudsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  4. State v. BumperCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969
  5. State v. BrownCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1973

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. SegarraCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1975
  2. State v. JoynerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004
  3. State v. CauthenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973

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

Powered by the Exa API