Legal Opinion

State v. . Wrenn

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 22, 1930PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Stacy, C. J.,

after stating the case: It is not seriously contended that all three of the defendants participated in any one of the transactions appearing of record. The dealings in connection with the school notes relate only to Wrenn and Faw, while those touching the road notes involve only Wrenn and Foster. And we have discovered no evidence of sufficient probative value to establish a conspiracy between any two of the defendants.

The gist of a. conspiracy has been described as an unlawful concurrence of two or more persons in a wicked scheme — a combination to* do an unlawful thing or to do…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. State v. . BradySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
  2. State v. Van PeltSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
  3. State v. . RitterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
  4. State Ex Rel. Swann v. MartinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  5. State v. . YoungerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1827

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

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. State v. . BealSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  2. State v. . LeaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
  3. State v. . WhitesideSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  4. State v. . DavenportSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
  5. State v. BealSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930

27 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