Legal Opinion

State v. Poindexter

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided May 1, 1984No. 8315SC946Published

1Opinion of the Court

PHILLIPS, Judge.

Defendant’s first and main contention is that the pretrial photographic identification procedure employed by the State was unnecessarily suggestive and created a substantial likelihood that the identification at trial was tainted, thus requiring its exclusion. This contention is without merit. Following defendant’s motion to suppress, Judge Lewis conducted an extensive voir dire hearing thereon. Testimony at the hearing indicated that within twenty-four hours of the robbery a group of five to seven photographs was presented to both Burnette and Saunders, but on separate…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. LongSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
  2. State v. CottinghamCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976
  3. State v. CampbellCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981

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

Powered by the Exa API